In the case of Commissioner, Central Excise and Customs and Another vs Reliance Industries Ltd., Supreme Court of India held that reliance on a judgment later overturned does not constitute suppression of facts.
Supreme Court held that where a statute contains both a general provision as well as a specific provision, the latter must prevail. Accordingly, Taxation Entry No.61 is relatable to ‘starch’ of any kind whereas Exemption Entry No.8 relates to products of ‘millet’. Hence, maize starch is covered by taxation entry and not by exemption entry.
Read about the Supreme Court’s decision on whether penalty can be imposed on self-assessment returns for alleged suppression of facts. Analysis of the case involving Commissioner, Central Excise And Customs vs Reliance Industries Ltd. Learn about the implications for GST and Income-tax matters.
A recent judgment by the Supreme Court of India has set a precedent, ruling that the issuance of a corporate guarantee on behalf of group companies by a director without consideration is not a taxable service. Discover the insights and implications of this judgment in our comprehensive analysis.
Read the analysis of the Supreme Court of India’s verdict in the case of Hasmukhlal Madhavlal Patel And Anr. vs Ambika Food Products Pvt. Ltd. And Ors. regarding disproportionate allotment of shares in a right issue by a private limited company. The court’s ruling examines the applicability of Section 81 of the Companies Act, 1956 and its implications for directors’ responsibilities.
Supreme Court held that the credit note issued by a manufacturer to the dealer, relating to the replacement of defective parts, is a valuable consideration and hence, leviable to sales tax.
SC in the Ghanshyam Vs Yogendra Rathi, concerning entitlement to eviction and mesne profits based on various documents such as power of attorney, will, agreement to sell, possession memo, and sale consideration receipts
A landmark judgment by Supreme Court of India emphasizing importance of prompt adjudication in show cause notices, as seen in ATA Freight Line Vs Union of India case.
Supreme Court held that Order giving substantial amendment cannot be said to be clarificatory in nature and accordingly, such amendment cannot be given retrospective effect.
Case study examines Trade Refuse Charges (TRC) collected by BMC in Mumbai from businesses within its municipal area based on a circular.
