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 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 Jharkhand High Court held that a marriage marked by 36 years of separation had become a "dead wood marriage," justifying disso...
Corporate Law : The Jharkhand High Court ruled that filing of a challan or charge-sheet alone is not a valid ground to reject anticipatory bail. C...
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 : Chhattisgarh High Court upheld ITAT's finding that the reassessment order exceeded the limitation under Section 153 and dismissed ...
Goods and Services Tax : Karnataka HC held GST liability must be determined under statute, not contract. Directions against GST authorities to pay contract...
Income Tax : Madras HC held one year of practice before Income Tax Authorities is mandatory for registration under Rule 257, despite prescribed...
Goods and Services Tax : The Madras High Court held that an order under Section 74 cannot be passed when the notice was issued under Section 73. The matter...
Goods and Services Tax : Bombay High Court restored GST registration subject to payment of outstanding GST dues, interest, late fees and penalty within pre...
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...
Deductions either under Section 10A or 10B would be made while computing the gross total income of the eligible undertaking and not at the stage of computation of the total income.
When partnership firm was transformed into private limited company, there was no distribution of assets and as such, there was no transfer and therefore, assessee was not liable to pay any tax on capital gains.
In the present case there are allegations on the petitioner of having caused loss to State-Exchequer to the tune of Rs 20 crores appx. by evasion of payment of GST and he has applied for grant of interim bail, mainly on account of the prevalent conditions of spread of COVID-19 virus.
Pirna Urban Co-Oeprative Credit Society Ltd. Vs ITO (Bombay at Goa High Court) The issue under consideration is the notice issued by the Income Tax Officer (ITO) to the petitioner’s bank i.e. Ratnakar Bank Ltd., requiring the bank to remit an amount of 2,33,42,040/- as dues towards the payment of income tax by the petitioner. […]
Section 194 C of the IT Act deals with deduction of tax at source when it comes to payment to contractors. In the present case, since neither the Assessee nor M/s. Prabhu Construction can be styled as contractors, it is obvious that the provisions of Section 194C of the IT Act were not attracted. Hence Section 194C will not be invoked in this case and therefore consequently provision of sec 40(a)(ia) would also not applicable.
The issue under consideration is that the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent not to declare its pending loan accounts as Non Performing Assets (NPA). The petitioner also seeks a direction to the respondent for grant of moratorium of three months to it in terms of circular issued by the Reserve Bank of India(RBI).
Learned counsel for the respondent contends that RBI guidelines and package are not applicable to the case of the petitioner, in as much as, the petitioner was already in default as on 01.03.2020 and the package is applicable only to those instalments which fall due on 01.03.2020 and also only to those borrowers who were properly servicing their account till 01.02.2020 and were not in default.
Section 84A of the Gujarat VAT Act is declared as ultra vires and beyond the legislative competence of the State Legislature under Entry 54 of List II of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India and is also declared to be violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India on the ground of being manifestly arbitrary, unreasonable and oppressive.
Bbooks of accounts were duly presented when the show cause notice was given to the assessee, and no discrepancy was found in the same, but non-presentation of the books of accounts at the time of survey cannot be the sole reason for rejection of the books of accounts.
Saluja and Company Vs State of Haryana and others (Punjab & Haryana High Court) Issue- Whether in facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the Mango Drink under the brand name “Slice” sold by the appellant, does not fall under Entry 100D of Schedule-C of the HVAT Act and […]
