We find from the provision that the Settlement Commissioner is free to grant further time for payment, under Section 245H(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 5. Having heard the learned senior counsel for the appellant and learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the respondents, we are of the view that in the facts and circumstances of this case, it is not necessary to relegate the appellant to the Settlement Commissioner for enlargement of time, since the payments have already been made.
Nareshbhai Bhagubhai vs Union Of India (Supreme Court) The issue which remains to be decided is that in the absence of an order passed on the objections under Section 20D, should the consequential steps be invalidated. We find that the challenge before this Court has been made by the Appellants with respect to a stretch […]
Judgement dated 9th August, 2019 of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the matter of Pioneer Urban Land and Infrastructure Limited and Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors. WP (C) No. 43/2019 and other petitions. While dismissing the various petitions filed by builders and upholding the constitutional validity of status of allottees as financial […]
C. Pradeep Vs The Commissioner Of Gst And Central Excise Selam & Anr (Supreme Court of India) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that indisputably assessment for the relevant period has not been completed by the Department so far. In which case, invoking Section 132 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 does […]
S3 Electricals and Electronics Private Limited Vs Brian Lau & Anr. (Supreme Court of India) A bare reading of Regulation 33(3) indicates that the applicant is to bear expenses incurred by the RP, which shall then be reimbursed by the Committee of Creditors to the extent such expenses are ratified. We are informed that, in […]
The Peerless General Finance And Investment Company Ltd. Vs CIT (Supreme Court of India) Receipts of subscriptions pursuant to collective investment schemes is to be treated as capital receipts even if it is shown as income in books of accounts Conclusion: Receipts of subscriptions in the hands of the assessee-company should be treated as capital […]
Issuing of notice under section 142(1) in the name of amalgamating company despite of the fact that AO was already known that amalgamating company having ceased to exist as a result of the approved scheme of amalgamation, that jurisdictional notice in the name of amalgamating company was invalid.
Assessee’s contention that assessee-charitable trust were not able to receive more amount by way of donation for their project in the third financial year 2017-2018 due to insertion of sub-section (7) of Section 35AC and therefore, Court may consider appropriate to invoke powers under Article 142 of the Constitution and allow assessee to receive
M/s. TVS Motor Company Ltd. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and Others (Supreme Court of India) A reading of Section 8(1) of the CST Act would show that classification is contained in the Central Act itself which treats sale to a registered dealer outside the State in one category and sale to an unregistered dealer […]
G.J. Raja Vs Tejraj Surana (Supreme Court in India) The provisions contained in Section 143A have two dimensions. First, the Section creates a liability in that an accused can be ordered to pay over upto 20% of the cheque amount to the complainant. Such an order can be passed while the complaint is not yet […]
