Appeals against every ITAT decision shall lie only before High Court within whose jurisdiction AO who passed assessment order is situated: SC
CIT Vs. Annasaheb Patil Mathadi Kamgar Sahakari Pathpedi Limited (Supreme Court) There are concurrent findings recorded by CITA, ITAT and the High Court that the respondent/Assessee cannot be termed as Banks/Cooperative Banks and that being a credit society, they are entitled to exemption under Section 80(P) (2) of the Income Tax Act. Such finding of […]
Held that section 16-B of the Himachal Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1968 (HPGST) would be attracted only after determination of the liability.
It is the case of the appellant that Mosquito Mats, Coils and Vaporizers and Mortein Insect Killers shall be classifiable as insecticides under Entry 44(5) and therefore chargeable to tax at 4%.
SC in UOI v. Baba Banda Singh Bahadur Education Trust held that educational institution making huge surplus is not eligible for section 10(23C)(vi) exemption
Moser Baer Karamchari Union Vs Union of India (Supreme Court of India) By way of this writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner – union has sought for an appropriate writ, direction or order striking down Section 327(7) of the Companies Act, 2013 as arbitrary and violative of Article 21 […]
Challenge to constitutional validity of section 140(5) of Companies Act, 2013 fails and it is observed and held that section 140(5) is neither discriminatory, arbitrary and/or violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) of Constitution of India
Tata Consultancy Services Vs State of Andhra Pradesh (Supreme Court of India) In this case Supreme Court examined the transactions relating to the purchase and sale of software recorded on a CD in the context of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act. The court held the same to be goods within the meaning of […]
Supreme Court held that the right of default bail under Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) is not merely a statutory right, but a fundamental right that flows from Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
SC held that employees of Government of Maharashtra, not entitled to claim Double Over Time Allowance under Chapter VI of Factories Act, 1948
