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 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...
Income Tax : The Calcutta High Court quashed a Section 143(3) assessment after finding that the assessee was denied a meaningful opportunity of...
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...
Custom Duty : The Bombay High Court held that the customs authority failed to follow a binding CESTAT decision classifying glucometers under Tar...
Income Tax : Bombay HC disposed of Revenue appeals below ₹50 lakh, holding the CBDT exception added on 20 August 2018 applies prospectively, ...
Income Tax : Punjab & Haryana HC upheld Section 153C notices, holding the satisfaction note was not belated and limitation objections should fi...
Income Tax : Madras HC held that merely issuing a corrigendum acknowledging the return did not rectify the defective assessment process and ord...
Company Law : Kerala HC held Rule 55 empowers NCLT to accept additional pleadings, setting aside refusal to entertain further objections in a Se...
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...
Akshaya Aqua Farms Vs Designated Committee (Madras High Court) The petitioner challenges order passed by the first respondent, the Designated Committee rejecting its application under the Sabka Viswas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme. The order is a one liner, which simply says ‘Dear Taxpayer, your SVLDRS Form for the ARN No LD1112190001929 has been rejected.’ No […]
Ideal Surgicals Vs National Company Law Tribunal (Kerala High Court) The challenge in these original petitions is against the proceedings of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Kochi Bench. IBC, 2016 is a Single Unified Umbrella Code, covering the entire gamut of the law relating to insolvency resolution of corporate persons and others in a time […]
Taxpayer filed the GST return within the time granted by Karnataka High Court and the return filed was a return as contemplated under section 62 (2) which is to be construed to be return filed within the time. If that were to be so, the return filed in terms of the High court order was a return in terms of section 62(2) and the best judgment assessment orders passed under section 62(1) would stand withdrawn.
The Petitioner filed petition against the order dated May 24, 2017 (Order) by the passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal denying the input tax credit (ITC) in respect of capital goods and imposing penalty stating that penal provisions are mandatory.
The citizen cannot be penalised for a discrepancy in the form prescribed by the respondent which has resulted in the form being unable to be submitted even in the case of a law abiding citizen.
Santosh Kumar Gupta Vs Union of India (Orissa High Court) The genesis of the case relates to the search conducted on 29.02.2020 in the office premises of M/s. Pacific Packaging Industries which is a proprietorship concern of the Petitioner by the Senior Intelligence Officers of the Directorate General of Goods and Services Tax Intelligence. In […]
In re Extension of interim orders in view of current wave of Covid-19 Pandemic Vs State of Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Pradesh High Court) FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER of ABDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT The current wave of COVID-19 pandemic has created havoc in the country with fast rising number of cases. Many of the learned advocates […]
Swan Silk Private Limited Vs ACIT (Karnataka High Court) The Assessing Officer with regard to claim disallowance of 50% of credit card expenses has held that the assessee has not adduced any evidence that drawings made by the Directors through their personal credit card are in fact, incurred for the purpose of business of the […]
The Hon’ble High Court in present facts of the case after interpreting the word ‘may’ have held that granting of 20% compensation under Section 143A of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is totally valid as the said provision is not discretionary in nature.
Novel Security Services Vs Additional Director (Karnataka High Court) In the present case, it is seen that every attempt made by the respondent to secure information/document from the appeal were stonewalled by the appellant. Though the show cause notice issued by the respondent which was impugned before the learned Single Judge was not preventive in […]
