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 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 Madhya Pradesh High Court closed the defamation proceedings after the applicant expressed regret for an erroneous statement an...
Corporate Law : The article traces Justice Tejas Karia's journey from an arbitration specialist to a Delhi High Court judge while highlighting his...
Goods and Services Tax : The Punjab and Haryana High Court held that a GST order passed without considering the assessee's reply and without recording reas...
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 : The High Court held that failure to pass the order giving effect within the time prescribed under Section 153 resulted in abatemen...
Income Tax : The Madras High Court held that unexplained trade credits falling under Section 68 cannot qualify for deduction under Section 80-I...
Goods and Services Tax : The Madras High Court held that GST proceedings under Section 74 were not time-barred after considering the COVID-19 limitation ex...
Corporate Law : The High Court held that once an NCLT-approved resolution plan comes into effect, claims not included in the plan stand extinguish...
Income Tax : The Delhi High Court held that an assessment relying on a seized document and its author's statement cannot be sustained without p...
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...
Assessee-employer had contributed a specific amount to each employee which was credited to a Staff Welfare Fund Account alongwith interest thereon and the amounts retained with the employer and the interest accrued in the name of a particular employee, was taxed in the hands of that employee. Hence though there was a common fund and accrual of interest, the same had to be treated as having been credited separately on the employees account in the relevant fund which was permissible for deduction under Section 36(1)(va).
If the dealer is a fly by night operator or a habitual offender or does not have sufficient means to pay the dues that may arise upon assessment, such action may be justified. Such drastic powers under section 83 of the Act should not be exercised as a matter of course, but only after due application of mind to the relevant factors.
Bhupendra Murji Shah Vs DCIT (High Court Bombay) We are not concerned here with the Circular of the Central Board of Direct Taxes. We are not concerned here also with the power conferred in the Assessing Officer of collection and recovery by coercive means. All that we are worried about is the understanding of this […]
M/s Lanco Amarkantak Power Ltd. Vs A.P. Panda, Chairman-cum-Managing Director (Chhattisgarh High Court) it is quite vivid that this Court while granting the appeal under Section 37(1)(b) of the Act of 1996 preferred by the petitioner not only set aside the order passed by the learned District Judge setting aside the award and restoring the […]
Tendu leaves has separate entry, wherein, VAT is payable @25% and the same cannot be clubbed in general entry ‘minor forest produce’ for availment of reduced rate exemption notification.
Thiru S.Shyam Kumar Vs ACIT (High Court Madras) The entire issue revolves around the factual matrix as to whether the slips, which contain certain details, were pertaining to payments made by the assessee, not brought into the books of accounts. Before the assessing Officer, the assessee has given more than one statement accepting the on-money payment. […]
Eris Life Sciences (P) Ltd. Vs DCIT (High Court Gujarat) As per sub-section (3) of section 201 which stood prior to 1.10.2014, the initiation of action for failing to deduct tax at source is barred by limitation. The amended sub-section(3) of section 201 with effect from 1.10.2014 enlarges the period of limitation to seven years which, as held by […]
M/s. SPIC Jel Engineering Vs ACIT (Madras High Court) CIT (A) had gone through the agreement and the drawings, which were enclosed as annexures and found that the nature of work carried on by the assessee, as a sub-contractor, for the refinery shut down clearly comes within the scope of foreign project, more specifically, assembly […]
A. Sridevi Vs ITO (Madras High Court) Admittedly, the original return filed by the assessee did not reflect the subject matter income, namely, the advance made by the assessee to the said Nagarajan of a sum of Rs.2.75 crores. When the earlier reopening proceedings was initiated with issuance of notice under section 148, the assessee […]
Where assessee was not a member/shareholder of the concerned company, therefore, loan/advance received from such company was not deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e).
