Madhya Pradesh HC

Writ petition not entertained as alternate remedy available to petitioner

Harinder Singh Bedi Vs Union of India (Madhya Pradesh High Court)

Madhya Pradesh High Court rejected the writ petition held that the petitioner is having a remedy to challenge the order/notice by way of filing an appeal and the ground raised by him with respect to jurisdiction of the authorities can always be considered by the authorities....

Read More

MPVAT: VAT Leviable for Trial Period of production too when Sale taken place during the same period

Prism Cement-Unit II Vs Commissioner of Commercial Tax (Madhya Pradesh High Court)

Prism Cement-Unit II Vs Commissioner of Commercial Tax (Madhya Pradesh High Court) A bare reading of the expression “Business” u/S.2(d) of M.P. VAT Act, 2002 reveals that tax is leviable inter alia on the event of manufacturer whether or not such event is carried on with motive to make gain or profit and whether or […]...

Read More

HC directs BDA to reconsider question of levy of GST on sale of developed plots

Shraddha Tiwari Vs Bhopal Development Authority (Madhya Pradesh High Court)

Petition is disposed of with direction to Bhopal Development Authority to reconsider question of levy of GST on sale of developed plots to petitioners ...

Read More

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) leviable only if there is deliberate intention to conceal income

CIT Vs S.Kumar Tyres Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (Madhya Pradesh High Court)

Madhya Pradesh High Court held that penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act not leviable in absence of deliberate intention to either conceal income or to furnish inaccurate particulars...

Read More

Section 271(1)(c) penalty cannot be imposed on debatable issue: MP HC

CIT Vs S. Kumar Tyres Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (Madhya Pradesh High Court)

CIT Vs S. Kumar Tyres Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (Madhya Pradesh High Court) Sub-Whether there can be any penalty u/s 271(1)(c) in respect of a debatable issue? The Division bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court was considering department’s appeal when ITAT had given relief to the assessee by holding that there could not have been penalty [&he...

Read More

Appeal challenging taxability of service against order of CESTAT lies before Apex Court

Capital Enterprises Through Dhiraj Jain Partner Rawal Market Vs Commissioner of Customs And Central Excise Manik Bagh Palace (Madhya Pradesh High Court)

Madhya Pradesh High Court held that appeal challenging the taxability of service, against the order of CESTAT, lies before Apex Court u/s 35L of the Finance Act, 1944 and not High Court....

Read More

Income Tax Offence can be Compound before Conviction but Not Thereafter

Ramesh Jain Vs Union of India (Madhya Pradesh High Court)

By conjoint reading of section 279(2) and clauses 7(v) and 8. (iii), it is explicit that the Income Tax Authorities have the power to compound the offence either before or after the institution of the proceedings but certainly not after the conviction....

Read More

HC direct CBIC to clarify eligibility under SVLDRS, 2019 when tax dues been paid in full

Sigma Construction Co. Vs UOI (Madhya Pradesh High Court)

Sigma Construction Co. Vs UOI (Madhya Pradesh High Court) The issue whether in cases when  tax dues have been paid in full, are eligible under SVLDRS, 2019 for waiver of interest or not. Hon’ble High Court directed CBIC to dwell upon the question and issue a clarificatory circular/instruction so that ambiguity prevailing in the field [...

Read More

Mere notice Issuance Not Attracts Doctrine of ‘Stare Decisis’

Keshav Kanshkar A Class Electrical Contractor Vs Principal Secretary Department of Energy (Madhya Pradesh High Court)

Keshav Kanshkar A Class Electrical Contractor Vs Principal Secretary Department of Energy (Madhya Pradesh High Court) ‘Precedent’, refers to a court decision that is considered as authority for deciding subsequent cases involving identical or similar facts, or similar issues. ‘Precedent’, is incorporated into the d...

Read More

Discretion vested with Judicial Forum must be exercised lawfully in a Judicious manner

Ganpat Pannalal Vs State Bank of India (Madhya Pradesh High Court)

Ganpat Pannalal Vs State Bank of India (Madhya Pradesh High Court) Conclusion: In the said case, the Hon’ble High Court while remanding the case to the Tribunal observed that the Tribunal under Section 22(1)(g) of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 was competent to restore the Securitization Application by imposition of reas...

Read More

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (6,180)
Company Law (8,632)
Corporate Law (10,966)
Custom Duty (9,597)
DGFT (4,888)
Excise Duty (4,932)
Fema / RBI (5,349)
Finance (5,765)
Income Tax (43,214)
SEBI (4,665)
Service Tax (4,095)

Search Posts by Date

December 2022
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031