Jagadish Kumar Basantani Vs ITO Bhopal and Others (Madhya Pradesh High Court) Regard being had to the similitude of the questions involved, on the joint request of the parties, the matter is being heard on the question of admission and interim relief. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has challenged the Constitutionality […]
Mahanagar Nagrik Sahakari Bank Maryadit Vs Union of India And Others (Madhya Pradesh) Reserve Bank of India Circular Dated 25th June 2021; related to RBI control over Urban Co-Operative Banks; Stayed by Hon’ble MP High Court Jabalpur. While hearing a writ petition challenging constitutionality of Banking Regulation (Amendment) Act, 2020, and consequential Circular dated 25 […]
Vijay Kumar Devnani Vs ITO and Anr. (Madhya Pradesh High Court) Madhya Pradesh High Court Stays Section 148 notice issued after 31st March 2021 as per the section 148 provisions which were effective only till 31st March 2021. The petitioner has challenged the validity of the Notification No. 20/2021 dated 31.03.2021 and Notification No. 38/2021 […]
Sai Kripa Farms Vs ITO (Madhya Pradesh High Court) In this judgements notice issued u/s 148 have been stayed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court for being issued after 31st March, 2021 as per the omitted provisions. The petitioner has challenged the validity of the Notification No. 20/2021 dated 31.03.2021 and Notification No. 38/2021 dated […]
Re-opening of the assessment proceeding was conducted on the basis of legally valid sanction accorded by the authority under provisions of Section 151 and the same was justified as it had been initiated on the basis of the material which had given rise to reason to believe as well as escapement of assessment had been quantified by AO.
The order of provisional attachment was not a final order and assessee had a remedy to raise all the pleas including that of jurisdiction of attaching authority and discrimination before the Adjudicating Authority and in the event these points were raised by assessee before the adjudicating authority, the authority should pass appropriate order in accordance with law.
Palak Agarwal Vs. CBDT & Anr. (Madhya Pradesh High Court) FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT ORDER /JUDGEMENT It is well know that Representations by the taxpayers and tax professionals association doesn’t make any difference to CBDT and CBIC and they act only when they receive Instruction from our Courts. 1. A Division Bench of […]
Om Trading Company Vs Deputy Commissioner of State Tax and others (Madhya Pradesh High Court) Learned Single Judge came to the conclusion that a detailed enquiry was conducted by the Commercial Department Range Agra and that the fact regarding issuance of invoices/e-way bills without any transportation of physical goods came into picture, therefore, verification in […]
Hitesh Nagwani Vs Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) (Madhya Pradesh High Court) From the record, it appears that the allegations of evasion of huge amount of customs duty have been levelled against the applicants, as according to the respondent, actual value of goods imported by undervaluation on the basis of using fabricated invoices is Rs.11,93,03,316/- […]
Respective officer was directed to dispose of complaints/FIRs filed in respect of economic offences and take appropriate action within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today.
