SC in case of Filco Trade Centre Pvt. Ltd. allowed ‘any aggrieved registered assessee’ to file a form seeking Transitional credit or revision thereof
Gharpure Engg. & Construction (Pvt) Ltd Vs Assistant Commissioner (ST) (Madras High Court) The challenge is to an order of assessment passed under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 for the period 2013-14. The substantial addition to turnover is on the ground of mismatch of particulars between the details contained […]
Held that Government is vicariously liable for negligence on the part of the Government hospital. Court ordered lumpsum compensation of Rs. 5 Lakhs payable to the petitioner.
The tax liability of the petitioner does not get effaced by efflux of time. The Department can attach the property under Rule 48 r/w Rule 60 and bring the same property for sale in terms of the provisions of the IInd schedule to the Income Tax Act, 1961.
It can be held that even before the issue of process or examining the sworn statement of the complainant, there could be cognizance in a particular case.
Held that import of gold is not prohibited, but restricted subject to prescribed quantity on payment of duty.
HC held that In the present case, the appellant had the right to apply for waiver of the interest charged under Section 234A or Section 234B, or Section 234C
B.C.Mohankumar Vs Superintendent of Central Goods & Service Tax (Madras High Court) Order for non-granting GST registration must be a speaking order The Hon’ble Madras High Court in the matter of M/s B.C. Mohan Kumar v Superintendent of Central Goods & Service Tax [W.P. No. 13272 and WMP. Nos. 12569 & 12571 dated June 16, […]
Interim custody of the vehicle which is dismissed by the order, dated 25.02.2022 on the ground that confiscation proceedings are already initiated and pending and therefore, it is not desirable to hand over the interim custody of the vehicle to the petitioner.
Tvl. Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited Vs Deputy Commissioner (CT) III (Madras High Court) Coming to the imposition of penalty and levy of interest under the impugned order, I am of the view that sustaining the same would be hyper-technical. No doubt, the petitioner has made an inadmissible claim of transition. However, I have noticed earlier […]
