Supreme Court refused to quash PMLA proceedings against JSW Steel, holding that questions on proceeds of crime must be decided by Appellate Tribunal first.
The Supreme Court clarified that a minor, on attaining majority, does not need to file a formal suit to cancel a guardian’s unauthorized sale of their property. The act of the former minor executing a fresh sale deed is sufficient conduct to legally repudiate the voidable transaction, making the subsequent sale valid.
The tax appellate authority dismissed the appeal of Tangerine Design Private Limited (AY 2018-19) on the disallowance of late employee EPF/ESI contributions.
Supreme Court of India, in Deputy Commissioner St & Ors Vs Wingtech Mobile Communications (India) Pvt. Ltd. & Anr, declined to interfere with a High Court’s order.
The Supreme Court restored the ITAT’s order, ruling that a temporary lull in business due to the absence of a contract does not constitute cessation if the intention and efforts to continue (like correspondence and bidding) exist. The decision allows the non-resident company to claim business expenditure under Section 37(1) and set-off unabsorbed depreciation under Section 32(2).
Supreme Court admits appeal by Tesco Bengaluru against CESTAT ruling on reverse charge service tax for seconded overseas employees, relying on the Northern Operating Systems precedent.
Supreme Court lists appeals for joint hearing to determine if a tin layer classifies tinted float glass as ‘absorbent’ (Entry 7005 10 10) or under other colored glass.
The Supreme Court restored just compensation for the family of a deceased engineer, ruling that for MACT claims, income must include all emoluments and allowances, not just basic pay and DA, correcting the High Courts exclusion. The ruling mandates calculating income tax based on actual statutory slabs, rejecting arbitrary flat deductions, and applying the mandatory 50% future prospects for permanent employees under 40.
Supreme Court held that since all three conditions required to sustain levy of tax u/s. 3F(1)(b) of the Uttar Pradesh Trade Tax Act, 1948 are fulfilled, tax is leviable on ink and processing material used in printing lottery tickets.
The Supreme Court ruled that bona fide purchasing dealers who paid tax to registered sellers cannot be denied Input Tax Credit under the DVAT Act, even if sellers defaulted on tax deposit.
