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...
Present application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with the order dated 29.10.2020 passed by the respondent No.2, Superintendent (Prev.), Central GST & C. Excise, Vadodara-II in File No. GEXCOM/AE/INV/GST/559/2020 on executing a personal bond of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the conditions that he shall;
PCIT Vs Redington (India) Limited (Madras High Court) These appeals have been filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) challenging the common order dated 07.07.2014 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ‘D’ Bench, Chennai (for brevity “the Tribunal”) in I.T.A.No.513/Mds/2014 (filed by […]
Indian Institute of Engineering Technology Vs DCIT (Madras High Court) With regard to disallowance of depreciation, it is not disputed by the learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Revenue that the issue is clearly covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Rajasthan […]
Rajesh Agrarwal Vs Reserve Bank of India (Telangana High Court) Aggrieved by the non-inclusion of principles of natural justice in the Master Directions on Fraud (‘the Master Circular’, for short), dated 01.07.2016, issued under Section 35A of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 by the Reserve Bank of India, aggrieved by the decision of the Joint […]
Sai Sun Outsourcing Services Private Ltd. Vs Union of India & another (Madhya Pradesh HC) Petitioner filed two applications, on 28.12.2019 and 14.01.2020 to avail the benefit of SVLDRS Scheme which was processed on the basis of correctness of “Tax Dues” declared in the application with reference to the amount of duty quantified in the […]
Vimal Yashwantgiri Goswami Vs. State Of Gujarat (Gujarat High Court) Be that as it may, we are inclined to quash the impugned order dated 25th February 2020 passed by the Commercial Tax Officer on the short ground that the same is a non-speaking order passed without any application of mind. It is very sad to […]
Cash Credit Account cannot be ordered to be attached. In other words, the Cash Credit Account is an account, which enables the assessee to borrow the money from the bank for the purpose of its business. Any money, therefore, which the bank may make available to the assessee would necessarily be in the nature of a loan or cash credit facility.
Money laundering is a serious economic offence and serious threat to the national economy and national interest and, these offences are committed with cool calculation with the motive of personal gain regardless of the consequences on the society.
Where AO did not record any satisfaction with regard to genuineness of the claim of the assessee before invoking the powers under section 14A read with rule 8D, disallowance was invalid because recording of satisfaction by AO is sine qua non for invocation of power under section 14A read with rule 8D
Since the authorities had detained the goods without affecting seizure and they had exceeded the time limit for detention of the goods even if it was construed to be a case of seizure therefore, authorities were directed to forthwith release the imported goods of assessee covered by the bill of entry on completion of the necessary legal formalities.
