M/s Vimal Petrothin Private Limited. Vs Commissioner, CGST and others (Uttarakhand High Court) Petitioner’s electronic credit ledger cannot be blocked for any period in excess of one year, in view of express provision contained in Sub-Rule (3) of Rule 86(A) of C.G.S. T. Rules. Thus, he submits that petitioner’s contention to this extent is correct […]
The Dehradun Chartered Accountants Society Vs. Union of India (High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital) High Court held that Admittedly, the country continues to suffer and to reel under the COVID-19 pandemic. A large number of assesses still find it difficult to even meet their Chartered Accountants and to file their Income Tax Audit Reports […]
The issue under consideration is whether amount of service tax being statutory levy, received by assessee from its customers was to be included in calculating the aggregate amount referred to in sub-section (2) of Section 44BB of the Act?
A full bench of Uttarakhand High Court has upheld the rights of a person working on a contractual basis to have the right of getting child care leave as same as any other regular Government employee. It was agreed that the child care leave is primarily for the benefit and a matter of right of the child, as a child whose mother happens to be employed on a contractual basis with the Government will have similar needs as any other child.
Bhuwan Chandra Pandey vs Union Of India And Others (Uttarakhand High Court) More than two decades have elapsed since the Supreme Court passed a landmark judgment in case of Vishakha vs. State of Rajasthan AIR 1997 SC 301, and formulate the famous ‘Vishakha guidelines‘, which inter alia providing guidance for the resolution of complaints through internal […]
M/s Livguard Energy Technologies (P) Ltd Vs State of Uttarakhand (Uttarakhand High Court) Uttarakhand High Court has declined to accede to petitioner’s request for release of vehicle and goods seized on merely furnishing an indemnity bond. It observed that it would be inappropriate to issue a direction contrary to provisions of Section 129 of the […]
The amount reimbursed to the assessee (service provider) by the ONGC (service recipient), representing the service tax paid earlier by the assessee to the Government of India, would not form part of the aggregate amount referred to in clauses (a) and (b) of sub-section(2) of Section 44BB of the Act.
Kundan Singh Vs State & others (Uttarakhand High Court) Salary is the property within the meaning of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India. No GST or Service Tax can be deducted from the salary of the petitioners without any authority of law. It is reiterated that the Principal Employer is the State Government. The […]
CIT Vs M/s T.V. Sundaram Ayangar & Sons (Uttarakhand High Court) It is stated that since there was no authorized translator in the Department as well as in the office of the Chief Standing Counsel, it took some time to translate the documents. Lastly, it is stated that due to above mentioned reasons, delay has […]
This appeal is filed against a common order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) relating to Assessment Years 1997-98 onwards, for a period of eight years, till 2004-05. On the filing of the Appeal, an objection was raised by the respondent/ assessee, represented by Mr. P.R. Mullick, Advocate, that the Appeal is filed beyond time.
