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.
Goods and Services Tax : The Court held that damages paid under an arbitral award do not qualify as consideration for a taxable service under GST. The ruli...
Corporate Law : The Allahabad High Court ruled that ordinary land disputes involving allegations of cheating cannot attract the Gangsters Act with...
Goods and Services Tax : The debate examines why GST penalties under Section 122(1A) may survive a direct challenge under Article 20(2). The key takeaway i...
Corporate Law : The Court directed trial courts to award just and reasonable compensation to survivors irrespective of conviction, acquittal, or a...
Goods and Services Tax : The Court held that recovery from third parties cannot be initiated when only a proposed demand exists and no final tax liability ...
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...
Goods and Services Tax : The Kerala High Court held that a composite show cause notice issued for multiple assessment years was legally unsustainable. The ...
Corporate Law : The Delhi High Court held that import restrictions could not apply to consignments that had arrived before the relevant notificati...
Goods and Services Tax : The Kerala High Court held that issuing one show cause notice for multiple financial years is not legally sustainable. While quash...
Custom Duty : The High Court held that prolonged custody and anticipated delay in trial cannot independently justify bail in cases involving com...
Custom Duty : The Delhi High Court discharged contempt proceedings after the petitioner tendered an unconditional apology and undertook not to 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...
The argument that the Indian parties should have discharged their TDS obligations u/s 195 despite the presumed request of the assessee is one of convenience or despair and not acceptable because in a practical view of the matter, the Indian payers could not have resisted the assessee’s request given future business prospects and the need to keep the assessee in good humour;
Capital gain arising of long term capital asset, if invested in specified asset, the assessee is not to be charged capital gains and exemption provided under Section 54EC of the Act cannot be denied to the assessee only on account of the fact that deeming fiction is created under Section 50 of the Act.
It was held by the Hon’ble High Court that the Department cannot be permitted to unjustly hold on the Appellant’s money without any interest, as it would amount to benefiting the Department from its own wrong.
(i) Whether Central Bureau of Investigation, popularly called CBI, is a constitutionally valid police force empowered to investigate crimes? (ii) Could a police force, empowered to investigate crimes, have been created and constituted by a mere Resolution of Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, in purported exercise of its executive powers?
Whether the Tribunal has power in terms of Rule 24 of the Tribunal Rules to dismiss an appeal before it without considering the merits of the appeal and only on the ground for want of prosecution?
The challenge in this petition is to the Circular dated 6th March, 2013 issued by the 1st respondent. The said circular lays down the procedure of preparation of a panel of Auditors and Auditing firms in accordance with the third proviso to sub-section (1) (a) of Section 81 of the Maharashtra
Notification No. 298/2013 – Income Tax (1) Fifteen years standing at the Bar. In calculating the 15 years standing at the Bar, services rendered as Judicial Officer shall be taken into consideration; (2) Annual declared gross income from profession should not be less than Rs.7,00,000/- for the past three years and should be an income tax assessee for 10 years preceding the date of consideration;
Proviso to Section 112(1) is applied, then almost all assessees covered by the first proviso to Section 48 would be liable to pay tax @ 10% only and not @ 20% on long-term capital gains. The proviso to Section 112(1) is applicable to units and zero coupon bonds, which are not covered by the first proviso to section 48 of the Act.
Whether expenditure incurred to meet out the need for working funds in which expansion of share capital was undertaken, is capital expenditure even when the purpose for which expenditure was incurred did not result in creation of an asset or benefit due to intervention by an external agency.
Merely because the assessee complies with the statutory procedural requirement of filing the prescribed form and certificate of the Chartered Accountant, cannot absolve the assessee of its liability if the act or attempt in claiming the deduction was not bonafide.
