Follow Us:

high court judgments

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.

Latest Articles


Magistrate, Police Officer Personally Liable for Illegal Detention: Allahabad HC

Corporate Law : The Allahabad High Court held that Magistrates and police officers may be personally liable for compensation where unlawful preven...

June 10, 2026 180 Views 0 comment Print

Premature GST Recovery from Customers Invalid: Madras High Court

Goods and Services Tax : The Court reaffirmed that taxpayers are entitled to due process before coercive recovery measures are initiated. Recovery actions ...

June 10, 2026 180 Views 0 comment Print

Illegal Police Detention Violates Article 21- Right to Life & Liberty: Allahabad HC

Corporate Law : Allahabad High Court ruled that unlawful police custody directly infringes fundamental right to life and liberty under Article 21....

June 9, 2026 342 Views 0 comment Print

ED Can Initiate PMLA Inquiry Without Prior FIR: Kerala HC

Corporate Law : The Court examined whether a predicate FIR is necessary before the ED can act under the PMLA. It held that inquiry proceedings and...

June 8, 2026 228 Views 0 comment Print

GST Registration in One State Can Be Denied for Non-Compliance in Another State

Goods and Services Tax : The Rajasthan High Court examined whether GST registration could be refused due to non-filing of returns in another State. It held...

June 8, 2026 171 Views 0 comment Print


Latest News


Latest Case Law Related to IBC 2016: January to March 2026

Corporate Law : The Supreme Court upheld joint insolvency proceedings against two interconnected real estate companies due to common management an...

May 21, 2026 345 Views 0 comment Print

Important Case Laws related to IBC 2016 – July – September 2025

Corporate Law : Supreme Court ruled that CoC and RP can surrender financially burdensome assets voluntarily, clarifying moratorium under section 1...

November 20, 2025 5349 Views 0 comment Print

BREAKING: Gujarat HC Orders CBDT to Ensure 1-Month Gap Between ITR & Tax Audit Dates

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...

October 13, 2025 21183 Views 1 comment Print

Rajasthan HC Extends Tax Audit Filing Deadline to 31 October 2025

Income Tax : Rajasthan High Court granted a one-month extension for filing TARs under Section 44AB for AY 2025-26, citing delayed audit utility...

September 25, 2025 1002 Views 0 comment Print

CAAS Files writ challenging persistent technical failures in Income Tax portal

Income Tax : The Gujarat High Court is hearing a petition from the Chartered Accountants Association regarding persistent glitches on the new I...

September 25, 2025 8127 Views 1 comment Print


Latest Judiciary


Income Tax Reopening Quashed as PAN Was Not Properly Transferred to Jurisdictional Officer

Income Tax : Bombay High Court quashed income tax reassessment proceedings after holding that the PAN was not transferred to the competent juri...

June 11, 2026 18 Views 0 comment Print

Scrutiny Assessment Quashed as Section 143(2) Notice Was Issued Without Jurisdiction: Calcutta HC

Income Tax : The Calcutta High Court upheld the ITAT's decision quashing the assessment after finding that the notice under Section 143(2) was ...

June 11, 2026 24 Views 0 comment Print

GST Order Quashed as Hearing Was Fixed Before Reply Deadline: Uttarakhand HC

Goods and Services Tax : The Uttarakhand High Court held that scheduling a personal hearing before the expiry of the time granted for filing a reply violat...

June 11, 2026 33 Views 0 comment Print

Section 80J Deduction Denied as Audit Report Was Never Filed: Bombay HC

Income Tax : The Court held that although filing the audit report along with the return is directory, complete failure to furnish the report is...

June 11, 2026 39 Views 0 comment Print

Allahabad HC Quashes GST Demand as Hearing Date Was Fixed Before Reply Deadline

Goods and Services Tax : The Court set aside a GST demand order after finding that the personal hearing was scheduled before the last date for filing a rep...

June 11, 2026 54 Views 0 comment Print


Latest Notifications


Co-op Society Can Deny Membership for ‘Refuge Area’ Flat: Bombay HC

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...

March 25, 2026 2460 Views 0 comment Print

Bombay High Court Enforces Video Conferencing Rules

Corporate Law : Bombay High Court implements "Rules for Video Conferencing 2022" for all courts in Maharashtra, Goa, and union territories, effect...

December 19, 2024 1977 Views 0 comment Print

CBDT Revises Monetary Limits for Tax Income Tax Appeals

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, ...

September 17, 2024 17457 Views 0 comment Print

New Video Conferencing Protocols Issued by Delhi High Court

Corporate Law : The Delhi High Court mandates new video conferencing protocols to enhance transparency and accessibility in court proceedings. Rea...

May 20, 2024 1746 Views 0 comment Print

Instructions for AO after Adverse observations of Allahabad HC

Income Tax : Income Tax Department Issues Instructions for Assessing Officers after Adverse Observations of Hon. Allahabad High Court in in Civ...

August 7, 2022 12960 Views 2 comments Print


Profits From offshore Supply of Hardware and Software Not Taxable – Delhi High Court

December 23, 2011 1912 Views 0 comment Print

DIT Vs Ericsson AB (Delhi High Court)- It was argued that the Explanation as initially inserted in the year 2007 after subsection (2) of section 9 sought to clarify as to when income received by way of interest, royalty or fees for technical services, can be regarded as deemed to accrue or arise in India. The subsequent amendment made in the Explanation by the Finance Act, 2010 enacts a further clarification (by effectively adding clause (ii) in the Explanation) in so far as the taxability of fees for technical services are concerned. The Supreme Court in Ishikawajima (supra) has held that if the transfer of property in goods as well as the payment were both made outside India, the transaction of supply was not chargeable to tax in India inspite of the fact that the contract was signed in India.

Merely because ITR-V sent to CPC not received for no failure on part of assessee, the return cannot be treated as invalid

December 22, 2011 5613 Views 0 comment Print

Though the Income Tax Department made a provision for electronic filing of returns, it appears that the ITR-V Form containing the due verification of the return of the assessee was required to be remitted only by ordinary post. The instructions which were furnished to assessees, a copy of which has been placed on record, specifically stipulate that the ITR-V form should not be sent either by registered post or by speed post or courier.

Outward transportation of finished goods from the place of removal covered by definition of ‘input service’ upto 31.03.2008, service tax paid thereon eligible as CENVAT Credit

December 20, 2011 3134 Views 0 comment Print

Outward transportation of finished goods from the place of removal covered by definition of ‘input service’ upto 31.03.2008, service tax paid thereon eligible as CENVAT Credit – CESTAT Larger Bench decision in ABB Ltd & Ors to this extent legal and valid till 01.04.2008 – No merit in Revenue Appeals. Revenue Appeals rejected.

Artificially Created Light Energy (ACLE) not goods, Consequently there is no sale of goods

December 20, 2011 1868 Views 0 comment Print

(a) The light energy which is used as a carrier in telecommunication service for rendering service is covered by the Parliamentary Legislation i.e. the Finance Act, 1994 read with Section 65 (109-a). It does not fall within the Entry 54 of List-II of VII Schedule. (b) The contract in question is not a composite contract. It is an indivisible contract and a contract of service simplicitor. There is no element of sale at all to any extent. It is not a contract of sales simplicitor as contended by the State.

Settlement by company amounts to compounding with principal debtor & results in discharge of surety

December 20, 2011 4995 Views 0 comment Print

‘Whether the revival scheme submitted by the petitioner under sections 391 and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 and accepted by Court amounts to compounding with the principal debtor leading to the discharge of the surety within the meaning of sections 134 and 135 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872?

Search without satisfaction of ingredients of S. 132(1) is illegal and consequently Notice action U/s. 153A of the Act is also bad in law

December 20, 2011 2603 Views 0 comment Print

Spacewood Furnishers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DGIT (Investigation)- Bombay HC – The mode and manner in which all these notes are prepared, show the absence of any relevant material with authorities which would have enabled them to have ‘a reason to believe’ that action under Section 132(1) of the Act was essential. No new material as such has been disclosed anywhere. No document or report of alleged discreet inquiry forms part of these notes.

Public sector financial institutions under obligation to fairly consider OTS proposal keeping in mind the RBI guidelines – Delhi HC

December 19, 2011 1188 Views 0 comment Print

Arjun Industries Ltd & Anr Vs. Industrial Development Bank Of India & Anr.(Delhi HC) – Para 7 of the order dated 23.05.2007 reads as under:- ‘During the course of arguments, we had put to learned counsel for the parties that prima facie there does not appear to be any legal impediment or obstacle in the assignment of the debt by financial institution like IDBI. However, if the respondents wish to contest the O.A. filed by the petitioner before the Debt Recovery Tribunal on merits and/or to contend that petitioner was also bound by the settlement recommended for acceptance by the petitioner predecessor-ininterest i.e. IDBI or to urge any ground on merits in defence to the OA,

E-filing of tax returns – Court cannot order that rule should be applied retrospectively, though E-filing should be encouraged

December 19, 2011 1925 Views 0 comment Print

Hindustan Zinc Ltd. Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr. (Jodhpur High Court) – Court is of the opinion that even though in the era of E-filing of the returns under the various laws, such a practice deserves to be encouraged and is acceptable form of filing of returns to the various Tax Department, it is admitted position before this Court that relevant Rules for filing of soft copies of these returns viz. VAT-07, VAT-08 and VAT-9, particularly assessment year 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 were not available on the statue book on the date when they were filed. In the present case, as aforesaid, the relevant amendments in Rule 19 and 1 9A reproduced above were brought w.e.f. 20.11.2007 and 29.8.2008 respectively. The notification Annex.10 placed on record also permits only a particular class of dealers to file such returns electronically. The notification dtd.27.2.2009 was given immediate effect and the date admittedly fell after relevant dates of filing of soft copy in the present case viz. On 16.10.2006, 30.11.2006, 28.2.2007 and 31.5.2007 respectively.

Expense on aborted public issue offer allowable as revenue expenditure

December 16, 2011 5284 Views 0 comment Print

CIT Vs.Nimbus Communications Limited (Bombay HC) – there is dispute that the assessee has in fact incurred the expenditure and that on account of the aborted public issue offer, no new asset has come into existence and consequently there is no question of the assessee getting any enduring benefit. With the approval of SEBI, the assessee was to increase the share capital and thereby promote its business activity. However, the same got aborted due to reasons beyond its control. In these circumstances, in view of the decision of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax V/s. M/s.Essar Oil Limited, Income Tax Appeal (L) No.921 of 2006 decided on 16th October 2008, in our opinion, no fault can be found with the decision of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in allowing the aborted share issue expenditure under Section 37 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Whether assessment can be re-opened beyond four years when all primary facts for making the claim were disclosed to the AO

December 15, 2011 2801 Views 0 comment Print

Kimplas Trenton Fittings Ltd Vs ACIT (Bombay HC) – In the present case, admittedly, the reopening of the assessment is beyond a period of four years of the end of the relevant Assessment Year. The jurisdictional condition under Section 147 in such a case is that there must be a failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for the assessment for that Assessment Year. As noted earlier, in the narration of facts, there was a disclosure by the assessee during the course of the assessment proceedings of the fact that (i) During the previous year ending 31 March 2004, a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was entered into with a Swiss Company; (ii) Under the MOU, the outstanding balance of the loan was settled at Swiss Francs 480,000 as against the outstanding balance of 800,000 Swiss francs;

Search Post by Date
June 2026
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930