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.
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 […]
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 doctrine of ‘stare decisis’, and requires courts to apply the law […]
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 reasonable cost […]
HC Held that respondent-bank (SIDBI) cannot withdraw from offer of One-time Settlement which is already accepted by the petitioner/ borrower.
Create Consults Vs State of Madhya Pradesh (Madhya Pradesh High Court) While generating the e-way bill, on account of a bonofide error, instead of detail of AVGOL India Pvt. Ltd. (Supplier), petitioner mentioned its own details. Meaning thereby the petitioner made attempt to demonstrate that the e-way bill which was generated by petitioner, should have […]
Robbins Tunnelling and Trenchless Technology (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of M.P. (Madhya Pradesh High Court) The present petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order dated 28-9-2019, whereby the appellate authority, respondent No.3 herein, has confirmed the imposition of tax to the extent of Rs.1112134/- and penalty […]
Maharaja Cables (C/O Maxwell Logistic Pvt Ltd) Vs Commissioner (GST) State Tax Indore (M.P.) (Madhya Pradesh High Court) HC held that inadvertent human error in generating E way bill cannot lead to proceedings and penalties under Section 129 of CGST Act, 2017. A tax invoice was generated which reflected the destination as well as the […]
It is trite law that whenever a litigant invokes a particular remedy available under a Statute, then the authority before whom the lis is preferred and pending, is ordinarily duty bound to decide the same on merits.
Elora Tobacco Company Limited Vs Union of India of Indirect Taxes (Madhya Pradesh High Court) The present review petition is nothing but a misuse of the process of law and wasting valuable time of the court with the intention to take one more chance instead of approaching the Supreme Court of India. Hence, the review […]
