HC held that alternative remedy will not operate as an absolute bar for entertaining the writ petition as jurisdictional issue goes to the root of the matter. Therefore, we are of the view that appellant has made out a case for entertaining this appeal and had also stayed the further reassessment proceedings. Accordingly, this writ petition is admitted for final hearing.
State of Madhya Pradesh Vs Sanjay Sharma (Madhya Pradesh HC) HC held that for cancelling the bail once granted the Court must consider whether any supervening circumstances have arisen or at the stage of post-grant of bail the conduct of accused demonstrate that it is no longer conducive to a fair trial to permit him […]
Space Enclave Private Limited Vs Income Tax Department and Others (Madhya Pradesh High Court) Since the jurisdictional issue has been raised before this Court, even assuming an alternative remedy u/S 246 of the Act of filing an appeal is available, it will not operate as an absolute bar for entertaining the writ petition as jurisdictional […]
Mount Everest Breweries Ltd. Vs State of Madhya Pradesh (Madhya Pradesh High Court) The learned counsel for petitioner submitted that earlier the petitioner had filed a petition bearing W.P. No. 8560/2016 seeking quashment of the assessment order issued by the respondents for the assessment year 2012-13 for arbitrarily levy of tax on beer under residual entry […]
Madhya Pradesh High Court held that as petition under section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 not maintainable as there was an agreement on procedure to be followed for appointing an arbitrator.
Madras High Court held that confirmation of Dabba trading is based on inadmissible piece of evidence. Accordingly, prosecution becomes a futile exercise and hence quashed.
In absence of any incriminating documents seized during search, AO is not justified in making addition in non-abated assessment orders u/S 153-A r/W Sec 143(3) of Income Tax Act of 1961.
HC held that even assuming an alternative remedy u/S 246 of the Act of filing an appeal is available, it will not operate as an absolute bar for entertaining the writ petition as jurisdictional issues goes to the root of matter and it is one of the exceptional factors carved out by the Hon’ble Supreme Court for exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
From the record it is apparent that this Court by order dated 08.05.2019 passed in W.P. No. 26509/2018 had directed the complaint/representation of the petitioner to be considered within two weeks. The same was made by the petitioner on 20.05.2019 and as per the petitioner, the same has not been decided till now and the impugned notice has been issued.
Ashoo Road Lines Vs Union of India (Madhya Pradesh HC) HC held that Since a show cause notice dated 04.12.2020 has been issued to the petitioner and others in which the validity of the panchnama is under consideration, hence the petitioner is having efficacious remedy to contest the show cause notice before the adjudicating authority. […]
