Held that Revenue needs to adduce proper evidence to show that the goods are classifiable under a different heading than that claimed by the assessee. The onus is on the Revenue to establish that the item in question falls in taxing category as claimed by them.
The assessee can file a revised return in a case where there is an omission or a wrong statement. But a revised return of income, under Section 139(5) cannot be filed, to withdraw the claim and subsequently claiming the carried forward or setoff of any loss.
It is now well settled proposition of law that electricity is a basic amenity of which a person cannot be deprived. Electricity cannot be declined to a tenant on the ground of failure/refusal of the landlord to issue no objection certificate.
After passing decree of eviction tenancy terminates and from that date landlord is entitled for mesne profits or compensation depriving him from use of premises.
SC Held that mere acceptance of the rent by the landlord after the expiry of the period of lease would not amount to waiver of the termination of lease.
Sunil Kumar Jian and Others Vs Sundaresh Bhatt and Others (Supreme Court) Whether the amounts of provident fund, gratuity, and pension fund should be separated from the liquidation and other rights of workmen in liquidation process The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sunil Kumar Jian and Others v. Sundaresh Bhatt and Others (decided […]
The show cause notice is the foundation on which the department has to build up its case. If the allegations in the show cause notice are not specific and are on the contrary vague, lack details and/or unintelligible that is sufficient to hold that the noticee was not given proper opportunity to meet the allegations indicated in the show cause notice.
Charu Kishor Mehta Vs Prakash Patel & Ors. (Supreme Court) Apart from making a bald statement of collusion between Defendant Nos. 1, 2 & 4 and the secured creditor, i.e., M/s. Phoenix A.R.C. Pvt. Ltd. there is nothing substantial as to how and as to what precise fraud has been committed. The only case of […]
Saurashtra Chemicals Ltd. Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd (Supreme Court) BRIEF FACTS: 1. The appellant purchased a standard fire and special perils policy from the respondent National Insurance Company Ltd. thereby insuring the risk of loss/damage to the stock of coal and lignite stored in its factory compound. 2. An additional premium was paid by […]
High Court was incorrect and wrong in quashing the criminal prosecution only on the ground that the tribunal has granted stay, subject to condition of pre-deposit, of the recovery of the tax and the penalty amount.
