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 : The J&K&L HC quashed Nazir Ahmad Ronga’s detention under the Public Safety Act, citing vague allegations and lack of evidence, s...
Goods and Services Tax : AP High Court invalidates unsigned GST orders without DIN, citing CBIC guidelines. Learn key legal takeaways and compliance requir...
CA, CS, CMA : Summary of tax and regulatory updates: income tax bonds, GST rulings, SEBI amendments, customs tariffs, and DGFT trade policy chan...
Corporate Law : Kerala HC quashes rape case, stressing case-specific analysis of allegations. Assumption that women won’t file false sexual assa...
Goods and Services Tax : Karnataka HC ने DGGI की ₹2.5 करोड़ की वसूली को अवैध ठहराया। जान...
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 ...
Goods and Services Tax : Chhattisgarh High Court dismissed Nandan Steels’ appeal against GST credit denial, ruling that delay beyond the prescribed limit...
Goods and Services Tax : Madras High Court invalidates assessment order in M.Vimalraj Vs Union of India due to lack of proper notice service under GST Act....
Goods and Services Tax : The Allahabad HC dismissed HDB Financial's writ petition challenging a ₹5.4 lakh GST penalty, advising the petitioner to pursue ...
Goods and Services Tax : Kerala High Court addresses GST show cause notice to Lakshmi Mobile, focusing on separate orders and hearing opportunities....
Goods and Services Tax : Madras High Court resolves Tvl. Arumugasamy tax case. 25% disputed tax payment allows a new hearing. Read the full order summary. ...
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...
In a case where the assessee had wrongly deposited IGST as CGST, the Jharkhand High Court has quashed the letter saddling petitioner company with liability to pay short paid IGST along with interest. The High Court however directed the petitioner to deposit IGST and to claim refund of CGST or adjust the amount wrongly deposited under CGST for future liability of CGST.
Simmant Kohli Vs Union Of India (Madhya Pradesh High Court) The Court opined that pending final adjudication whether property is in the name of petitioner are ‘Benami’ property or not, the authorities concerned have passed an order of provisional attachment as a matter of precaution, until the dispute is finally resolved, no interference is warranted. […]
The prayer in the Writ Petition is for a direction to the 1st respondent to supply copies of the documents relied upon by the 1st respondent while issuing the notices, and thereafter, to afford the petitioners an opportunity to submit their objections with regard to the reliance placed on the same, before proceedings to adjudicate the matter.
Tarapore & Company Vs State of Jharkhand (Jharkhand High Court) We find that the petitioner firm had acted absolutely in a bona fide manner, as is also apparent from the impugned order dated 20.11 .2017, as contained in Annexure-5 to the writ application, and had discharged its tax liability by paying the VAT amount to […]
Raj Chamunda Roadlines Vs State of Gujarat (Gujarat High Court) Having regard to the fact that the petitioner has already paid the amount of Rs.1,85,248/, which is more than the amount of fine in lieu of confiscation in terms of the order of confiscation passed under section 130 of the Central Goods and Service Tax […]
he total replacement cost of three machineries in question purchased by the Assessee amounting to Rs.54,59,149/- came to be allowed by the Tribunal as ‘repairs maintenance expenditure’ or ‘revenue expenditure’.
Election Commission Of India Vs Central Information Commission (Delhi High Court) An EVM which is sought for by this RTI application is not miniature/replica and hence cannot said to be a model. It cannot be termed to be information within the meaning of Section 2(f) of the Act. It is manifest that Section 3 of the […]
A reading of Section 83 of the CGST Act makes it clear that a sine qua non for exercising powers under this provisions is that proceedings should be pending u/s 62, 63, 64, 67 or 74 of the CGST Act. Presently, the proceedings u/s 67 are no longer pending and pursuant to search, proceedings under any of the other sections mentioned in Section 83 were not initiated.
A. B. Pal Electricals Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court) as per Notification No. 49/2019 dated 09.10.20 19 issued by CBIC, the date prescribed for filing of Form GST TRAN-1 under Rule 117 (1A) of the CGST Rules has been extended to 3 1.12.2019. This itself demonstrates that the Respondents […]
Sunder System Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court) Sub-section 4B to Section 73 of the Fin Act fixes the time or limitation period within which the Central Excise Officer has to adjudicate and decide the show cause notice. The time period fixed under Clause A or B is six months […]
