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 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 : Madras HC held morphed obscene images are a serious attack on a woman's privacy and dignity. It directed prompt police action and ...
Corporate Law : The Chhattisgarh High Court upheld the acquittal after finding the relationship was consensual. A later refusal to marry did not e...
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 : Karnataka High Court held that reopening a completed scrutiny assessment without fresh tangible material is impermissible as it am...
Income Tax : Karnataka High Court held that Section 14A disallowance must be based on actual expenditure and remanded the matter for fresh comp...
Income Tax : Delhi High Court ruled that expenditure cannot be disallowed under Section 14A unless exempt income is actually earned in the rele...
Corporate Law : Bombay HC held societies only recognize members for administration, not title. Membership cannot be denied over unresolved ownersh...
Corporate Law : Allahabad HC ruled that cyber crime investigations must comply with BNSS requirements, including furnishing the FIR and specifying...
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...
Service Providers in Telecom Sector” meant and included only the Telecom Service Providers of services mentioned therein. The ambit and scope of such exclusion was not of Service Providers who render services to such Telecom Service Providers. Though, a similar list was not appended to FTP or HBPv1, there was no reason for a different interpretation to be placed to FTP 2015-20. Clearly, what was made ineligible for availing benefit of SEIS in terms of paragraph 3.09(2)(i) were the Telecom Service Providers and not the Service Providers who provide services to such Telecom Sector.
Inhuman Condition At Quarantine Centres And For Providing Better Treatment To Corona Positive Vs State of U.P. (Allahabad High Court) FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER of ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT 1. In online hearing of this Public Interest Litigation, we have heard Shri Manish Goel, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Shri A.K. Goel, learned Additional Chief […]
Bhupendra Harilal Mehta Vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Bombay High Court) Conclusion: Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas (DTVSV) Act, 2020 was a beneficial legislation and department could not deny the benefit if assesee was eligible for the same. Thus, department had to pass a fresh order in Form No.3 determining tax payable by assessee as […]
Aircel Cellular Limited Vs DCIT (Madras High Court) Legal provisions involved As per first proviso to Section 147 where assessment has already been made under Section 143(3) and assessee had disclosed truly and fully all material facts necessary for assessment then AO cannot initiate reassessment proceedings under Section 147 beyond 4 years from end of […]
Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd. Vs Union of India (Madras High Court) Conclusion: Once a resolution plan was duly approved by the Adjudicating Authority under sub-section (1) of Section 31, the claims as provided in the resolution plan shall stand frozen and will be binding on the Corporate Debtor and its employees, members, creditors, including the […]
Dar Housing Limited Vs National E-Assessment Centre Delhi & Anr. (Delhi High Court) Delhi High Court admitted and granted stay against assessment order passed passed by National e-assessment centre by not considering the submissions of the assessee and not providing the opportunity of hearing to the assessee. FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER of DELHI HIGH COURT 1. […]
Pankaj Behari Saha Vs State of Tripura (Tripura High Court) Analysis of Section 53 of the TVAT Act would show that as per sub-section (1) thereof, for a dealer whose turnover crosses the prescribed threshold limit for any year, has to get his accounts audited within six months from the end of that year and […]
Joshi John Vs Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (Kerala High Court) It is not disputed that ‘M/s. R. Menon and Associates’ is a partnership at will. Section 43 of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 provides that when a partnership is ‘at will’, the firm may be dissolved by any partner giving notice in writing […]
Suo Moto Vs State of U.P. (Allahabad High Court) Suo Moto Allhabad HC Order Extending The Time Limitations Of Interim Orders In This Phase Of Pandemic In the wake of recent upsurge of pandemic Covid-19, affecting one and all in the State of Uttar Pradesh, consequence whereof the courts at all levels are working with […]
Considering the fact that the petitioner has also not been able to utilize the credit of duty under the provisions of GST which came to be effected from 01.07.2017, legitimate export incentives cannot be denied to the petitioner. I find no merits in denying the benefit of refund claim filed by the petitioner under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Rules, 2004. The respondent shall therefore refund the amount to the petitioner within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
