No notice whatsoever was issued to the legal representative/s of the assessee before undertaking the reassessment proceedings. Thus, the impugned re-assessment and the assessment order having been passed against the dead assessee, is invalid and the same cannot be sustained in the eyes of law.
Held that applicant, subjected to any enquiry or investigation or audit, is not eligible to make a declaration under ‘Voluntary Disclosure’ under SVLDRS Scheme
Sonjoli Construction Co. Vs Union of India (Rajasthan High Court) Petitioner submitted that the petitioner was entitled to apply under the SVLDR Scheme and he filed the timely application and deposited the due tax amount under the said Scheme. However, application filed by the petitioner has been rejected only an erroneous ground that audit had […]
Section 148A notices of Income Tax are time barred for Assessment year (A.Y.) 2017-18, Rajasthan High Court Stays the operation of the Notice
Hemant Gokhru vs. UOI & Ors (Rajasthan High Court) Learned Senior Counsel Shri Balia assisted by Shri Priyansh Arora submits that as per first proviso to Section 149 of the Income Tax Act, the impugned notice dated 22.7.2022 issued to the petitioner under Section 148 for the assessment year 2014-2015 is without jurisdiction because it […]
Held that application u/s 7 for triggering CIRP may be initiated by a financial creditor either individually or jointly with other financial creditors with total minimum threshold for initiation of CIRP being fixed at INR 1 Crore.
Ercon Composites Vs Union of India (Rajasthan High Court) Shorn of legal technicalities what emerges is that the petitioner as a 100% EOU would have made purchases of raw material and inputs from the local market without payment of excise duty as well as not born duty on final product manufactured by it on a […]
The petitioner was unquestionably prosecuting his refund claim in a bonafide manner which ought not to have thrown away on hyper-technical objection of not having been filed before the competent authority and/or not having been filed in the prescribed format and finally as being delayed.
In case of rendering of health care/medical services and not supply of goods, the value recovered by the hospitals towards the cost of medicines, implants, stents, lenses and various other charges towards room rent, supply of food could not be classifiable as sale or supply of goods but the transaction would be of service on account of Predominant Test/ Aspect Doctrine.
HC has issued interim protection against arrest and directed the Petitioner to appear before the concerned authority in response to the summon received under Section 70 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
