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 : 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 Patna High Court held that media must avoid labels implying guilt before a trial concludes. It directed news platforms to rest...
Goods and Services Tax : The Madras High Court emphasized that Section 74 requires clear evidence of fraud, wilful misstatement, or suppression and cannot ...
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 : Gujarat High Court upheld deletion of the Section 271D penalty, holding that absence of recorded satisfaction in the assessment or...
Income Tax : Bombay High Court held Section 153C notices invalid as the satisfaction note was not recorded immediately after the searched perso...
Income Tax : Bombay High Court dismissed the Revenue's appeal, holding it could not challenge the ITAT's addition after not appealing the CIT(A...
Income Tax : The Madras High Court ruled that employers cannot grant Section 89 relief or refund TDS unless employees submit Form 10E under Sec...
Income Tax : Orissa High Court held that Covid-19 constituted genuine hardship, directed Form 10B to be treated as filed in time, and ordered r...
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...
Shri Amman Dhall Mill Vs Commissioner of Customs (Kerala High Court) Conclusion: Appellate Tribunal committed serious error in law by ordering release of Canadian Green Peas under Section 125 on payment of redemption fine as by holding that release of goods was the only option to Customs Commissioner in the case on hand the language […]
Where there was non-consideration of material evidence by a statutory authority, judicial review by the High Court in exercise of it’s power under Art.226 of the Constitution of India is permissible, and existence of alternative remedy is not a bar for exercise of such power.
Naresh Dayal & Ors. Vs Delhi Gymkhana Club Ltd. & Ors. (Delhi High Court) The present suit has been filed by seven plaintiffs who are all members of defendant No.1 Club in a representative capacity claiming that they are the permanent members of defendant No.1 which has 5553 permanent members, about 4925 person enjoy the […]
Assistant Commissioner-V, Sales Tax was acquitted for allegedly demanding Rs.4,000 as illegal gratification after 25 years as there was no recovery from the appellant, presumption U/s 20 regarding acceptance of bribe could not be raised against him and there was neither any demand nor acceptance or recovery from the appellant. Hence, all the ingredients of an offence U/s 7 and 13(1)(d) could not be satisfied. The conviction order was prima facie unlawful as Section 20 was not invoked.
Pinax Steel Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Bihar (Patna High Court) Having heard learned counsel for the parties, as also perused the record, we are in agreement with Sri Gautam Kejriwal, learned counsel for the petitioner, that the principles of natural justice, in passing the order stands violated. Also, we are of the view […]
Learned counsel for the respondent on the other hand has relied on the Section 28AAA of the Customs Act to contend that the SCN is not time barred inasmuch as the petitioner is guilty of suppression of facts and wilful mis-statements in claiming the benefits under the Scheme. Prima facie we find merit in the contention of the respondent.
Pro Sportify Private Limited Vs Principal Commissioner, Central Goods and Services Tax (Punjab and Haryana High Court) The Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 came into force w.e.f. 01.09.2019, thus any enquiry/audit/investigation initiated after aforesaid date cannot make any person ineligible because period running from 01.09.2019 to 31.12.2019 is meant for filing application and […]
Flair Writing Industries Ltd. Vs Union of India (Gujarat High Court) The Gujarat High Court issued the notice to Government over constitutional validity of the proviso to Section 50 of CGST Act, 2017. The subject matter of challenge in the present litigation is to the constitutional validity of the proviso to Section 50 of the […]
The Hon’ble High Court concluded that order passed by JCCT Appeals cannot be said erroneous. Also concluded that the position adopted by ADC is not in line with KVAT Laws where the order passed by ADC was based on assumption that the benefit of refund of tax paid on purchase of Inputs can be granted only in respect of manufacture and processing of goods which is not at all prescribed under the law. Accordingly, there is no justification on the part of ADC in invoking revisional power u/s 64 (1) of the KVAT Act.
BGR Mining & Infra Limited Vs State of Jharkhand (Jharkhand High Court) We have considered the submission of learned counsel for the parties in respect of the issue of levy of interest under Section 50 of the Act on the gross tax liability as upheld in appeal by the Respondent Joint Commissioner of State Sales […]
