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.
Income Tax : Bombay High Court rules on tax evasion by Buniyad Chemicals, addressing unexplained credits, money laundering, and regulatory acti...
Goods and Services Tax : Bombay HC ruled that an SCN cannot be issued without considering the reply to a pre-consultation notice, emphasizing procedural fa...
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 : 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 High Court rules that payments to Fugro for geological surveys do not qualify as fees for technical services under DTAA ...
Goods and Services Tax : Madras High Court dismisses Ragem Motors' writ petition on GST demand for non-taxable receipts, citing availability of statutory r...
Income Tax : Bombay HC quashed Trent Ltd.’s tax refund adjustment under Section 245 of the IT Act, citing a violation of natural justice. Rev...
Corporate Law : Bombay High Court removes a bail condition restricting overseas travel, ruling that passport retention violated the Passports Act,...
Goods and Services Tax : Madras High Court addresses GST registration cancellation for non-filing. Details on compliance and court-ordered revival conditio...
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...
Recent Judgement in the case of Saraf Natural Stone Vs UOI (Gujarat High Court) on Interest on Delayed Refund from Honorable Gujrat High Court as under – Facts: M/s. Saraf Natural Stone (referred as ‘SNS’), is partnership firm engaged in exporting of marble or natural stones, has refund claim for the exports made, the department […]
Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that interest on the delayed payment has been levied, petitioner is entitled to adjust the same for input tax credit and can be paid in cash, however GST portal do not allow the same unless and until entire cash is paid.
Smt. Kalpana Ashwin Shah Vs ACIT and Ors. (Bombay High Court) 1. The Petitioner has challenged the orders passed by the Assessing Officer as well as the Commissioner of Income Tax, requiring the Petitioner to deposit 20% of the disputed tax pending Appeal against the order of the assessment subject to which the remaining recovery […]
Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was correct in holding that the assessee was not an ordinary resident without appreciating that the amendment brought in Section 6(6) by the Finance Act, 2003 w.e.f. 1.4.2004 was clarificatory in nature and had to be given retrospective effect as communicated by the Circular No. 7 of 2003 issued by the CBDT?
Bharat Vikas Parishad Maharana Pratap Nyas Vs CIT (ITAT Delhi) After considering the rival submissions, we are of the view that Order under section 80G(5) denying approval to the assessee cannot be sustained in Law. It is not in dispute that assessee has been granted registration under section 12AA of the I.T. Act, 1961, by DIT […]
M/s. EPCOS Electronic Components S. A. Vs Union of India (Delhi High Court) The next issue is whether the intimation under Section 143(1) of the Act was prejudicial to the interest of the Assessee. It must be noted here that although the tax calculated as payable in the return filed and accepted by the Department […]
Faisal Ahmed Abdul Malik Javeri Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court) No doubt, there are certain decisions, in which it has been held that the provisions of Customs Act will not affect the powers of jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. There is absolutely no dispute as regards […]
M/s System India Castings Vs Pr. CIT (Chhattisgarh High Court) It was mentioned that the assessee has preferred an Appeal against the penalty order before the CIT (Appeals), Raipur, which is pending for decision. When the CIT (Appeals) heard the appeal preferred by the assessee on merits, it reached to the conclusion that the petitioner […]
M/s. Panduranga Stone Crushers Vs. Union of India (Andhra Pradesh: Amaravati) Petitioner is permitted to rectify GSTR-3B statements for the months of August and December, 2017 and January and February, 2018 manually subject to the outcome of the writ petition. It is made clear that if the petitioner submits a rectified statements for the above […]
Invocation of rule 8D of Income Tax Rules without recording satisfaction as to non-correctness of assessee’s claim of suo motu disallowance under section 14A of Income Tax Act, 1961, was in contravention of provisions of section 14A(2), therefore, additional disallowance was deleted.
