Sylph Technologies Limited Vs Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (Madhya Pradesh HC) The time limit for issue of notice under section 149 is in respect of Section 148 and not for Section 148A. 1. The AO had issued issued a notice dated 28.06.2021 under pre-amended sec. 148 of the Income tax Act. 2. Later […]
Held that the delay of few hours of expiry of the validity of the tenure of e-way bill was bonafide and without establishing fraudulent intent and negligence on the part of petitioner. Penalty set aside.
Held that qualification of the arbitrator as per the arbitration agreement is pre-requisite for eligibility to be appointed as an appointed as an arbitrator. Arbitrator not satisfying the qualification is ineligible and arbitral award passed by such ineligible arbitrator cannot be sustained in the eyes of law.
Held that provisions of section 11(6) are judicial one and hence principal of opportunity of hearing or putting other party to notice is imperative. In absence of issuance of notice u/s 11 of A&C Act, order and proceedings gets vitiate.
HC held that tax liability imposed on assessee is valid as assessee was aware of transaction alleged as ineligible on which ITC was availed
Held that the machine and two DG sets are under seal for more than two years. The impugned action of the department is wholly without jurisdiction for which the petitioner is liable to be compensated
Vaishali Varshikar Vs Vijay Mourya (Madhya Pradesh High Court) The applicant has preferred this application under Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C. for cancellation of bail granted to the respondent No.1/accused by order dated 22.2.2021 passed by this Court in M.Cr.C.No. 4337/2021. As per prosecution story, respondent no.1/Vijay Mourya had entered into an agreement to sell of […]
Admittedly, no limitation is provided for filing an appeal under Section 3G(5) of National Highways Act, 1956. Therefore, it can be construed, as held in the aforesaid judgments, that Article 137 of the Limitation Act would stand applicable to such cases.
Agrawal Petrolium Co. Vs PCIT (Madhya Pradesh High Court) The main grievance put forth is that when petitioner received a notice under Section 148A(b) of Income Tax Act, the petitioner filed a reply on 15.03.2022 but the same was not considered by the respondent. Learned counsel for the parties by placing reliance on para-3 and […]
Powers under Section 9 of the A& C Act cannot be invoked by the competent Court prior to the termination of the conciliation proceedings under the MSMED Act.
