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...
Rajeev Traders Vs State Of U. P. (Allahabad High Court) Allahabad High Court held that once it was admitted that assessee had not recorded goods found stored at his disclosed place of business, in his books of account, a presumption of goods having been ‘secreted’ as per CGST Section 67 did arise. Upholding seizure of […]
LC Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India (Karnataka High Court) Section 73 of the Chapter XV of the Act – contemplates that where it appears to the proper officer that any tax has not been paid or short paid or erroneously refunded, or where input tax credit has been wrongly availed or utilised […]
Ssay & Associates Vs ICAI (Delhi High Court) Conclusion: Since the accounts filed with the Registrar of Companies for the years 2006-07 to 2008-09, that is, for the three years prior to the period for which KNA was appointed, had been audited by M/s Manu Sharma and Co. and therefore, there was no necessity for […]
Allahabad High Court has held that tax liability cannot be fixed on the transporter merely because the assessee/transporter did not furnish the details of the consignor and the consignee of the completed transactions.
Mr. Mahendra Kumar Singhi Vs Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Karnataka High Court) Though several contentions have been raised with reference to initiation of the action under the GST Act and CST Act, since the scope of these petitions is limited only to consider the bail applications, the other points which have been raised are not […]
Where in service sector, the entity has involved itself in various kinds of steps, some of which are preliminary to setting up the main substantial commercial venture such as appointment of key personnel, preparation of draft model development agreement and initiation of process to tender financial and advisory services, then, claim for deduction of depreciation, preliminary expenses and employee’s remuneration was to be allowed.
C.M.S. Info Systems Ltd. Vs Commissioner, CGST, Mumbai East & Ors. (Bombay High Court) We find that the fundamental submission of the petitioner before the AARA was the fact that money would stand covered by the definition of ‘goods’ under Section 2(52) of the GST Act so long as the same is not used as […]
Maulikkumar Vinodkumar Patel Vs TRO (Gujarat High Court) In this case it was held that TRO has powers to order personal summons, Penadancy of recovery proceedings before TRO entitles invoking of Section 131, Requirement of Rule 83 of Schedule II and S. 131 requiring attendance of witness gets fulfilled when assesse appears before TRO. Absence […]
The Court held that Plaintiff’s and the Defendant’s claim needs to be adjudicated comprehensively by the same forum. Till the defence is adjudicated, there is no threat to the assets of the Plaintiff and the continuation of the counter claim would not adversely impact its assets.
High Court held that Income Tax Refund cannot be withheld by Income Tax Department for error in Computer System. It held that the computer system cannot override the factual aspects and if Income Tax refund is payable than whether the computer systems accepts or not, is of no consequence.
