Access significant and up-to-date high court judgments for legal insights and precedent. Stay informed about the latest legal decisions and their impact on various areas of law.
Corporate Law : Delhi High Court sentenced a YouTuber to six months’ imprisonment for criminal contempt after finding that his videos and courtr...
Corporate Law : The Allahabad High Court criticized the NHRC for closing a custodial death case by relying solely on police reports without indepe...
Corporate Law : The Jharkhand High Court ordered an enquiry after finding that judicial inquiries mandated under Section 176(1-A) CrPC were not co...
Corporate Law : Applying Exception 2 to Section 375 IPC, Rajasthan HC ruled that no rape offence could be made out against a legally wedded husban...
Corporate Law : The Allahabad High Court observed that throwing non-vegetarian food waste into the River Ganga could hurt the religious sentiments...
Corporate Law : The Supreme Court upheld joint insolvency proceedings against two interconnected real estate companies due to common management an...
Corporate Law : Supreme Court ruled that CoC and RP can surrender financially burdensome assets voluntarily, clarifying moratorium under section 1...
Income Tax : Gujarat HC has directed CBDT to ensure that there is a mandatory one-month gap between date for furnishing tax audit reports (unde...
Income Tax : Rajasthan High Court granted a one-month extension for filing TARs under Section 44AB for AY 2025-26, citing delayed audit utility...
Income Tax : The Gujarat High Court is hearing a petition from the Chartered Accountants Association regarding persistent glitches on the new I...
Goods and Services Tax : The High Court held that disputes involving factual examination and merits under Section 74 of the CGST Act must ordinarily be pur...
Goods and Services Tax : The Supreme Court stayed further proceedings arising from a Section 74 GST order while examining whether writ petitions can be ent...
Goods and Services Tax : The Rajasthan High Court held that refusal to hear the appeal on merits would cause grave prejudice where cancellation of GST regi...
Goods and Services Tax : The Gauhati High Court held that a Summary Show Cause Notice in Form GST DRC-01 cannot substitute the mandatory notice under Secti...
Goods and Services Tax : The Kerala High Court held that although the earlier communication was not a Section 74 notice, the subsequent GST DRC-01 notice p...
Income Tax : The Court held that membership cannot be granted where the underlying flats do not exist and are merely refuge areas. It ruled tha...
Corporate Law : Bombay High Court implements "Rules for Video Conferencing 2022" for all courts in Maharashtra, Goa, and union territories, effect...
Income Tax : CBDT raises monetary limits for tax appeals: Rs. 60 lakh for ITAT, Rs. 2 crore for High Court, and Rs. 5 crore for Supreme Court, ...
Corporate Law : The Delhi High Court mandates new video conferencing protocols to enhance transparency and accessibility in court proceedings. Rea...
Income Tax : Income Tax Department Issues Instructions for Assessing Officers after Adverse Observations of Hon. Allahabad High Court in in Civ...
The High Court held that disputes involving factual examination and merits under Section 74 of the CGST Act must ordinarily be pursued through statutory appeals. It ruled that neither lack of jurisdiction nor violation of natural justice was established to justify bypassing alternate remedies.
The Supreme Court stayed further proceedings arising from a Section 74 GST order while examining whether writ petitions can be entertained despite statutory appellate remedies. The Court linked the matter with a pending case involving similar jurisdictional and natural justice concerns.
The Rajasthan High Court held that refusal to hear the appeal on merits would cause grave prejudice where cancellation of GST registration impacted business continuity and livelihood. The Court exercised writ jurisdiction to condone the delay.
The Gauhati High Court held that a Summary Show Cause Notice in Form GST DRC-01 cannot substitute the mandatory notice under Section 73(1) of the AGST Act. The GST demand order was quashed for non-compliance with statutory procedure.
The Kerala High Court held that although the earlier communication was not a Section 74 notice, the subsequent GST DRC-01 notice prima facie met statutory requirements. The Court directed the taxpayer to pursue statutory appellate remedies.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court held that retrospective GST cancellation is invalid where the show cause notice does not specifically propose such action or disclose its basis.
The Madras High Court held that Section 6(2)(b) bars parallel GST proceedings on the same subject matter already examined by Central authorities and remanded the matter for overlap verification.
The High Court ruled that absence of the assessing officer’s signature renders GST assessment orders legally defective. It held that such defects cannot be cured under Sections 160 or 169 of the CGST Act.
The Andhra Pradesh High Court held that absence of a DIN number rendered the GST assessment order invalid. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication subject to deposit of 20% of the disputed tax.
The Court dismissed a plea seeking refund of GST penalty paid during detention of goods, observing that the taxpayer had made payment without protest and had not pursued the statutory appellate remedy.
