It should be kept in mind that the offences under Section 132(1)(b)(c)& (i) of the OGST Act are punishable with a maximum punishment of five years Rigorous Imprisonment. Therefore, investigation ought to be completed within 60 days as per Section 167 Cr.P.C. Of course, Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. permits the investigating agency to keep the investigation open. B
Rama Devi Sabat Vs DCIT (Orissa High Court) Contending that the initiation of the reassessment proceedings was based merely on a change of opinion, the present petition has been filed. A perusal of the reasons mentioned above for reopening of the assessment reveals that there was no new material available with department. It is also […]
Reassessment under section 148 was not justified as ‘reason to believe’ that income for the AY in question had escaped assessment was based on a mere ‘change of opinion’.
Smt. Smrutisudha Nayak Vs Union of India (Orissa High Court) Orissa High Court held that assessment proceedings cannot be initiated if no incriminating materials are seized at the time of the search. Smrutisudha Nayak (Petitioner”)filed the petition challenging the initiation of the assessment proceedings under Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (IT Act). […]
Jyoti Construction Vs Deputy Commissioner of CT & GST (Orissa High Court) 1. As far as the above contention is concerned, the Court is of the view that the prayer of the Petitioner that the debiting of the ECRL made by it should be reversed is a separate cause of action for which the Petitioner […]
Shiva Cement Limited Vs Director of Income Tax (Inv.) (Orissa High Court) It is trite that under Section 132(1) of the Act, the jurisdictional facts should be established by the Department to justify a search authorization. But there cannot be any presumption that there is no such information available with the Department. The observations by […]
Bright Star Plastic Industries Vs Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax (Orissa High Court at Cuttack) The Court finds merit in the contention of Mr. Harichandan that for the fraud committed by the selling dealer, which resulted in cancellation of a selling dealer’s registration, there cannot be an automatic cancellation of the registration of the purchasing […]
AO was justified to reopen the computation of surcharge for the periods 2000-01, 2001-02 and 2002-03 as re-computing the tax payable to give effect to the judgment of the Supreme Court, which the authorities were bound to do, could not be termed illegal.
Jagat Janani Services Vs Goods & Service Tax Council (Orissa High Court) Service tax recovered in excess of amount approved by resolution plan is to be refunded by GST department In M/s. Jagat Janani Services v. Goods & Service Tax Council and Others [W.P.(C) No.17196 of 2020 dated September 21, 2021], M/s. Jagat Janani Services […]
Sunny Motors Vs CBIC (Orissa High Court) Legitimate carry forward of ITC cannot be denied for non-filing of TRAN-1 – directed Department to permit filing of TRAN-1 till November 01, 2021. Current petition has been filed to direct the Department to accept the Goods and Services Tax (GST) TRAN-1 form under Rule 117 of the […]
