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 held that a 21-year-old woman cannot be compelled to return home or marry against her wishes, treating residence, marria...
Corporate Law : The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that judicial officers cannot be intimidated for delivering judgments since every judicial orde...
Corporate Law : The article argues that failure to comply before the AO or CIT(A) can lead to adverse assessments, as higher forums generally cann...
Corporate Law : The Bombay High Court held that merely organising protests or morchas against government decisions cannot justify externment. It r...
Corporate Law : The Delhi High Court held that an unnatural death in police custody attracts constitutional liability under Article 21, even if ca...
Corporate Law : The Supreme Court upheld joint insolvency proceedings against two interconnected real estate companies due to common management an...
Corporate Law : Supreme Court ruled that CoC and RP can surrender financially burdensome assets voluntarily, clarifying moratorium under section 1...
Income Tax : Gujarat HC has directed CBDT to ensure that there is a mandatory one-month gap between date for furnishing tax audit reports (unde...
Income Tax : Rajasthan High Court granted a one-month extension for filing TARs under Section 44AB for AY 2025-26, citing delayed audit utility...
Income Tax : The Gujarat High Court is hearing a petition from the Chartered Accountants Association regarding persistent glitches on the new I...
Income Tax : Delhi HC upheld a Section 69C addition for unexplained capitation fee, holding that no credible evidence established its source an...
Income Tax : Gujarat HC held that Section 80P(4) does not bar Section 80P(2)(d) deduction on interest earned by a cooperative society from inve...
Corporate Law : Gauhati HC held that transportation of manufactured tea is not exempt under Entry 21(a), as Section 65B(5) governs the meaning of ...
Goods and Services Tax : Delhi HC directed processing of GST refund with interest, holding that appellate orders must be implemented unless stayed by a com...
Goods and Services Tax : Delhi HC held that GST refund cannot be withheld merely due to a proposed appeal, directed release of refund with interest, and tr...
Income Tax : The Court held that membership cannot be granted where the underlying flats do not exist and are merely refuge areas. It ruled tha...
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...
Nagpur Municipal Corporation to ensure that, no feeding of street dogs takes place at any place except at the own place of the dog feeder or in the dog shelter homes or any other authorised place and we also direct him to impose appropriate penalty for any breach of these directions, which penalty may not be more than of Rs.200/- for every breach as per the resolution already passed in this behalf by Nagpur Municipal Corporation.
Abhay Trading Pvt. Ltd Vs National Aluminium Company Ltd (Orissa High Court) 1. The challenge in the present petition is to continuance of the Arbitrator presently seized of adjudicating the dispute between the parties in view of declaration made by such Arbitrator on 9th September, 2021 that his younger brother was at that point in […]
Siddhi Vinayak Syntex Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India (Gujarat High Court) With effect from the year 2011 a time limit has been prescribed for determining the amount of duty of excise where it is possible. It cannot be gainsaid that when the legislature prescribes a time limit, it is incumbent upon the authority to […]
Calcutta High Court held that appeal against acquittal of accused in a cheque bounce case can be filed only before High Court under Section 378(4) of CrPC and not before Sessions Court.
Petitioner seeks quashing of order dated cancelling GST registration as well as order dismissing appeal filed by petitioner. In this case Assessing Officer has suo motu cancelled the GST registration of the petitioner on the ground of non-filing of returns and as GST Tribunal has not been constituted under Section 109 of the CGST Act, petitioner would be left without any remedy.
Valecha Investments Pvt. Ltd Vs ITO (Bombay High Court) HC held that mere default in payment of tax, unless such default arises out of circumstances which has the effect of assessee defeating payment, the expression ‘willful attempt’ cannot be imported to mean failure to pay tax. It is also held in paragraph 10 that mere […]
Petitioner, wishing to rectify the error, had attempted to submit an application for amendment of the registration certificate. However, while filling the application Online, the Accountant had selected ‘cancellation’ from the drop down menu instead of ‘modification’. It is thus that the impugned order has come to be passed cancelling the registration with effect from 01.05.2020.
Agriculture Produce Market Committee Vs ITO (Bombay High Court) It is observed that reply filed by the petitioner to the notice has not been taken into consideration especially in view of the fact that such reply was filed on 31.03.2022 and on the same day the impugned order came to be passed on 10.41 p.m. […]
Pramod Kumar Vs ACIT (Telangana High Court) HC is of the view that present is not a fit case to interdict the proceedings at the very threshold. Reasons have been assigned by the assessing officer as to why the explanation given by the petitioner could not be accepted. Certainly, such reasons given have a nexus […]
Merely placing the blame on the counsel cannot justify the inordinate delay of 1546 days. Even the particulars have not been furnished as to when the appeal was filed, when it was returned, the name of the counsel, whether the appellant had thereafter met the counsel etc. On the basis of such bald statements, we are not inclined to condone the inordinate delay of 1546 days. No sufficient cause has been shown.
