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


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 189 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 213 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 153 Views 0 comment Print

Calcutta HC Bars Shifting of Registered Office If IBC Appeal Pending

Corporate Law : The High Court held that a company cannot shift its registered office after approval of a resolution plan when appeals against the...

June 8, 2026 141 Views 0 comment Print

UP Police More Loyal to Government Than Constitution: Allahabad HC

Corporate Law : The Allahabad High Court held that allegations arising from private land transactions and cheating claims did not satisfy the requ...

June 7, 2026 477 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 5343 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


Madras HC Quashes GST Demand as Sale of Land Is Outside GST Purview

Goods and Services Tax : The Court observed that the documents produced indicated a sale of immovable property, which is not subject to GST. The matter was...

June 9, 2026 54 Views 0 comment Print

Madras HC Remands GST Demand Orders Due to Alleged Non-Consideration of Taxpayer Replies

Goods and Services Tax : The Madras High Court remitted Section 74A GST orders for fresh adjudication after taxpayers argued that their replies to DRC-01 n...

June 9, 2026 51 Views 0 comment Print

Cash Loan Transaction Enforceable as Violation Of Section 269SS Does Not Void Debt

Corporate Law : High Court upheld conviction under Section 138 NI Act, holding that contradictory defence evidence failed to rebut statutory presu...

June 9, 2026 465 Views 0 comment Print

Single GST Notice for Multiple Years Not Permissible: Madras HC

Goods and Services Tax : The Madras High Court held that GST authorities cannot issue a single show cause notice covering multiple financial years. The Cou...

June 9, 2026 69 Views 0 comment Print

No Pre-Deposit Needed to File Income Tax Appeal Under Section 246A: Madras HC

Income Tax : The Madras High Court held that filing an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) under Section 246A does not requi...

June 9, 2026 69 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 2457 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 17439 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 1740 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 12954 Views 2 comments Print


Bombay High Court dismissed about 400 appeals of Income Tax department

July 11, 2009 1387 Views 0 comment Print

The I-T department has lost the opportunity to recover revenues running into thousands of crores after failing to file its appeals before the Bombay High Court within the stipulated period of 120 days. The Bombay High Court has dismissed about 400 appeals recently. Section 260 A of the Income-Tax Act stipulates that an appeal against the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT)

Practice as advocate not required for appointment as HC judge

July 10, 2009 610 Views 0 comment Print

Shri. Satish Chandra, former ITAT Member, was appointed judge of the Allahabad High Court on 6.8.2008. The appointment was challenged on the ground that he had not practiced for even a day as an advocate and that he was not eligible for appointment under Article 217(2) and Article 217(1) of the Constitution. It was also alleged that the mandatory process of consultation under the Constitution had not been followed.

UOI vs. Dharmendra Textile 306 ITR 277 (SC) on 271(1)(c) penalty distinguished

July 6, 2009 13073 Views 0 comment Print

The assessee claimed that its entire receipts were exempt from tax u/s 10 (29). The AO took the view that only income “derived” from warehousing was exempt and not other income. The AO’s stand was confirmed by the ITAT. The AO levied penalty u/s 271 (1) (c) for concealment of income which was deleted by the Tribunal with the finding that though the claim was wrong, the assessee

TRO may enquire in respect of benami property for recovering the outstanding demand of the assessee

July 6, 2009 807 Views 0 comment Print

With regard to the question as to whether Panna Bai was the benamidar of Dwarka Prasad Agarwala or not, the TRO, held that without doubt the transaction was benami and the real owner of the property at 13,Kalipukur Lane (Road), Sheoraphully, Hooghly, was Dwarka Prasad Agarwala and Panna Bai, wife of Dwarka Das Agarwala, was the ostensible fictitious owner.

Applicability of section 44BB of the IT Act on mobilization/ demolization charges received by a non-resident foreign company

July 3, 2009 2914 Views 0 comment Print

Brief facts of the case giving rise to this appeal are that assessee, a non-resident foreign company, engaged in the business of providing services in connection with extraction and production of mineral oils, submitted its return of income declaring income at Rs. 2,11,79,270/ – for the Assessment Year 1999-2000. The case was processed under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act

Tax planning as opposed to tax evasion has legal sanction

July 2, 2009 1018 Views 0 comment Print

The Madras High Court has ruled that tax planning as opposed to tax evasion has legal sanction, and if a dealer plans his transactions in such a manner that he pays less tax, it is not open to the revenue to subject him to a conscience audit or moral assessment. The power to lift the veil has to be exercised with great care and caution. Justice V Ramasubramanian on Friday allowing petitions by a registered dealer

Section 271(1)(c) can be invoked only if there is a "concealment of particulars of income"

July 1, 2009 907 Views 0 comment Print

20. It seems to us that the revenue functions in the same manner as other departments of administration, wherein the accepted norm is, to shift the responsibility of decision making to the judiciary. In sum and substance, the judiciary not only adjudicates upon legitimate controversies between quarreling parties, but also discharges the executive function of decision making

Voluntary retirement compensation and chargeability to tax if payment is stretched over a period of years

June 16, 2009 1582 Views 0 comment Print

Benefit in lieu of salary payable to an employee opting for voluntary retirement is exempted from being charged to tax to the extent of Rs. 5 lakhs by reason of section 10(10C); even if the payment is stretched over a period of years, the same would not become chargeable to tax in any subsequent assessment year

Making and sale of advertising materials for customers is advertisement service liable for service tax

June 14, 2009 4534 Views 1 comment Print

The making and sale of advertising materials for customers in the form of banner or hoarding or film-slide, etc. is `advertisement’ as defined under section 65(2); all commercial concerns engaged in any of the activities connected with advertisement, which includes making, preparing, displaying or exhibition of advertisement, answer the description of `advertising agency’.

If revenue believes that Assessee evaded tax by furnishing fake or exaggerated bills then they need not disclose the reason of search & seizure

June 14, 2009 1015 Views 0 comment Print

6. Section 132(1) (b) & (c) of the Act to the extent relevant to the present case reads thus:- 132. (1) Where the [Director General or Director] or the [Chief Commissioner or Commissioner] [or any such (Joint Director) or (Joint Commissioner) as may be empowered in this behalf by the Board], in consequence of information in his possession, has reason to believe that-(a) any person to whom a summons under sub-section

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