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 : Bombay HC criticizes Pune Police for copying FIR from private complaint, highlighting legal implications and citizen harassment is...
Corporate Law : Allahabad HC asserts that Section 498A IPC is often misused against entire families to exert pressure. Employment prospects should...
Corporate Law : The Orissa High Court ruled that voter ID alone is not reliable for determining age in insurance claims, directing LIC to reassess...
Corporate Law : Delhi High Court recent judgment highlights the alarming misuse of the POCSO Act, where cases are filed due to family objections t...
Corporate Law : J&K&L High Court quashes money laundering case against Farooq Abdullah, citing absence of a scheduled offence under the Prevention...
Corporate Law : SC rules on Special Court jurisdiction; NCLAT redefines financial debt; HC upholds IBBI regulations and addresses various insolven...
Goods and Services Tax : HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA: Ramesh Kumar Patodia v. Citi Bank [WPO NO. 547 OF 2019 JUNE 24, 2022 ] Facts: ♦ Petitioner is a holder ...
Goods and Services Tax : CGST, Gurugram (Anti Evasion) Vs Gaurav Dhir (Chief Judicial Magistrate, District Courts, Gurugram) U/s 132(1)) r/w 132(1)(b)(C)(e...
Corporate Law : In order to dispense with the physical signatures on the daily orders (which are not important/final orders and judgments) of the ...
Custom Duty : Delhi High Court admits petition questioning Validity of provisions in Finance Act 2022 which overruled landmark Judgment of Supr...
Income Tax : Calcutta HC remands Somnath Commosales Pvt Ltd case to AO for fresh assessment. The final opportunity is granted; non-cooperation ...
Goods and Services Tax : Allahabad High Court ruled Section 130 of GST Act can't be applied for excess stock found during search; Section 73/74 should be u...
Income Tax : Calcutta HC dismisses appeal by revenue, upholds ITAT decision quashing PCIT order under Section 263 on MAT credit and doubtful de...
Income Tax : Calcutta High Court affirms ITAT's decision to delete income tax addition under Section 69 due to lack of direct evidence against ...
Goods and Services Tax : Allahabad HC rules that GST authorities can survey business premises for verifying transactions when goods are intercepted without...
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...
Corporate Law : Delhi High Court has exempted the Lawyers from wearing Gowns practicing in the High Court with effect from March 2, 2022 till furt...
Corporate Law : Till further orders, all documents/ not summons/Daks through physical mode be dispensed with, except where there, is a specific or...
Income Tax : Hon’ble Judges to hear the matters physically at the Principal Seat at Bombay, on experimental basis with effect from 1st Decemb...
Meinhardt Singapore PTE. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Service Tax (Delhi High Court) Whatever be the constraint, the assessee was faced with, it was duty bound to remit amounts collected by it towards service tax, in a planned manner, and as required by law. The deposit belatedly, by it, on the ground that the amounts were […]
Where AO had failed to issue notice under section 143(2) before completion of assessment, addition made under section 68 during reassessment proceedings was deleted because issuance of notice under section 143(2) is a mandatory obligation on the part of AO.
PR. CIT Vs Green Delhi BSQ Ltd. (Delhi High Court) The respondent-assessee was to construct, operate and maintain bus shelters. The respondent-assessee was also under an obligation to pay Rs.4.09 crores per month to the Delhi Transport Corporation. The shelters were not owned by the respondent-assessee. The Central Board of Direct Taxes vide Circular No. […]
M/s. Ayyan Fireworks Factory (P) Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner (CT)-I (FAC) (Madras High Court) Reopening of assessment on mere Audit Party Opinion without disposing Objection of Assesee is not valid The Assessing Officer has to independently record his view for such reopening if he proposes to reopen and thereafter, notice has to be issued to […]
Since neither from reasons nor from any other material on record, it could be gathered that there was any failure on the part of the assessee to disclose truly and fully all-material facts, reopening of assessee’s assessment on ground that she had not disclosed capital gain in her return of income filed, could not be held justified.
Torrent Power Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Gujarat High Court) Gujarat High Court quashed the Circular No. 34/8/2018-GST dated 01.03.2018 which proposes levy of GST on activities carried out by DISCOMS against recovery of charges from consumers under the State Electricity Act i. Application fee for releasing connection of electricity ii. Rental Charges against metering […]
Pr. CIT Vs M/s Viksit Engineering Ltd. (Bombay High Court) Buying and selling of share in short span of time doesn’t changed character of capital gain as business income High Court of Bombay in case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-II v/s Viksit Engineering Ltd vide its ITA Appeal No:485 dated 26th November 2016 has held […]
A1 Cuisines Private Limited Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court) Facts : Petitioner seeks issuance of Writ directing the respondent UOI to exempt the petitioner from charging applicable taxes under the GST legislations on sale of cosmetic products, perfumes etc. to the International passengers and claim refund of any input tax paid on input […]
PSN Automobiles Private Limited Vs. UOI & CBIC (Kerala High Court at Ernakulam) Petitioner, has submitted that the amount of 1% the dealer collects from the purchaser of a car worth more than ten lakhs, under Section 206C(1F) of the Income Tax Act, cannot be treated as an integral part of the value of the […]
The petitioner says that he is a senior citizen of 65 years of age and because he is not in possession of Form No.16, he has suffered at the hands of the Department. Let, therefore, the necessary steps be taken in law so that such occurrences are avoided in future.
