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.
Goods and Services Tax : Karnataka HC ने DGGI की ₹2.5 करोड़ की वसूली को अवैध ठहराया। जान...
CA, CS, CMA : Key tax & legal updates from 3rd-9th Mar 2025: Income tax exemptions, GST rulings, RBI liquidity measures, IBC cases, and Supreme ...
Income Tax : Explore February 2025's key income tax rulings covering issues like R&D deductions, secondment taxability, trust exemptions, and d...
Goods and Services Tax : February 2025 GST Case Law Compendium covers significant High Court and Supreme Court judgments on key GST issues. Orders issued u...
Corporate Law : Explore key landmark civil cases in India, including their legal impact on constitutional rights, reservations, governance, and wo...
Corporate Law : Key IBC case law updates from Oct-Dec 2024, covering Supreme Court and High Court decisions on CoC powers, resolution plans, relat...
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 ...
Corporate Law : Karnataka HC upholds Flipkart's stance on TDS under Section 195, ruling seconded employees' salaries as reimbursements, not taxabl...
Income Tax : Delhi High Court sets aside DRP's order in FIS Payment case, directing a fresh review under ITAT rulings on Section 56(2)(viib). K...
Custom Duty : Delhi High Court held that repeated placing and removing from call books is not a valid justification for non-adjudication of show...
Goods and Services Tax : Mohit Enterprises Vs Commissioner of State GST And Vat Department of Trade And Taxes Delhi (Delhi High Court) Delhi High Court, in...
Goods and Services Tax : Allahabad High Court dismissed the writ petition and held that seizure of goods under section 129 of the IGST/ CGST Act can be don...
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...
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...
Radheshyam Spinning Pvt Ltd Versus Union Of India (Gujarat High Court) After the present writ application was filed on 18th December 2020, Section 49 of the CGST came to be amended w.e.f. 01/02/2019 and new Section 49A and Section 49B were inserted in the said Act. By virtue of power under Section 49B, Rule 88A […]
Kiran Gems Private Limited Vs Union of India and Ors. (Bombay High Court) Petitioner submitted that the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 has no provision empowering CERA to conduct audit of the petitioner’s records also merits acceptance. Brief perusal of the annexure to the impugned communication reveals that detailed audit of the petitioner’s […]
Surya Roadways Vs Senior Intelligence Officers (SIO) (Gujarat High Court) The short point for the consideration of this Court is whether the two trucks could have been seized under Section 129 of the Act, 2017, more particularly when both the trucks were not in transit carrying any goods. Indisputably both the trucks were seized from […]
Application of bail by assessee was rejected as assessee had created three fake firms for procuring bills from the firms based at Delhi who had no purchases and tax which was not deposited for these transaction was utilized by the firms for not only availing ITCs but for getting the refunds by showing the sales to export units. Thus, refund was received for the tax which was actually never received by Revenue.
The Income Tax Department is also directed to consider the provisioning of a facility in its software to upload Income Tax Returns with the actual amount paid and for the system to accept the said returns even though the complete amounts had not been paid.
The subject matter of challenge in the present writ application is to the Entry No.3(if) of the Notification No.11/217 -Central Tax (Rate) dated 28th June, 217 read with Para-2 of the said notification. It appears that the writ applicant has entered into an agreement with a developer, i.e., the fourth respondent herein with respect to a purchase of plot of land
M/S Sdb Diamond Bourse Vs Union Of India (Gujarat High Court) Mr.Vyas is right to a certain extent that the issues raised by the writ applicants before the ARA have been gone into by the Commissioner in the Order in Original. In other words, the Authority, in its order dated 16th July 2020, has adjudicated […]
Syed Jafar Abbas Vs Commercial Tax Officer (High Court Gujarat) The subject matter of challenge in the present writ application is to the impugned order dated 04.06.2020 cancelling the GST registration of the writ applicant w.e.f. 24.10.2018. We need not delve much into the facts of this litigation as the order impugned deserves to be […]
Surat Mercantile Association & 5 Other(S) Vs Union Of India & 2 Other(S) (Gujarat High Court) 1. We have heard Mr. Vinay Shraff, the learned counsel assisted by Mr. Parth Shah, the learned counsel appearing for the writ applicants. 2. The subject matter of challenge in the present writ application is to the constitutional validity […]
Since in statement in Form SVLDRS2, no specific notice for affording the opportunity of hearing was given to assessee with regard to variance of quantified amount, therefore, the officer was not justified in rejecting the application under Form SVLDRS2A stating inter alia that, the application was not eligible under the category of investigation, enquiry or audit.
