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 Andhra Pradesh High Court held that refund arising from an unconstitutional GST levy carries a constitutional right to interes...
Corporate Law : The Allahabad High Court observed that criminal case delays are caused not only by judicial officers but also by inadequate infras...
Corporate Law : The Delhi High Court quashed a POCSO FIR after noting that the relationship was consensual and the parties were married with a chi...
Goods and Services Tax : You Already Filed One Refund Application… So You Cannot File Another?” Bombay High Court Says GST Law Does Not Work That Way S...
Corporate Law : The article questions why West Uttar Pradesh has been denied a High Court Bench despite contributing the majority of pending cases...
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...
Corporate Law : SC clarifies limits of High Court's writ powers in IBC cases and recognises Indian CIRP as foreign main proceeding in cross-border...
Goods and Services Tax : Bombay High Court held that GST registration cannot be cancelled without proper hearing and a reasoned order. The Court quashed th...
Income Tax : Bombay High Court held that delay in filing Form No. 10 for claiming accumulation under Section 11(2) should be condoned where gen...
Goods and Services Tax : Karnataka High Court held that consolidated show cause notices under Sections 73 and 74 of the CGST Act can legally cover multiple...
Income Tax : The Delhi High Court held that additional documents already referred to in a criminal complaint can be filed later under Section 3...
Income Tax : The Delhi High Court held that shareholders of a foreign company cannot be taxed on the company’s rental income and capital gain...
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...
Karnataka High Court flags catch-22 in TDS prosecution of ex-MD post-liquidation; directs Official Liquidator to act on representation, grants interim protection, remedy lies under Sec 260A.
Karnataka High Court quashes Sec 148A(d), Sec 148 notice and ex-parte assessment due to non-receipt of Sec 148A(b) notice; remands for fresh reply, keeps all issues open.
The High Court ordered rescheduling of bar elections after authorities failed to implement the Supreme Court’s 30% reservation for women. The ruling reinforces that constitutional directives under Article 142 are binding and cannot be ignored.
Karnataka High Court sets aside Sec 154 rectification, remands Sec 54 exemption claim for fresh review; validity of Sec 154 left open, assessee to appear before AO without notice.
The issue was whether a show cause notice could be issued under a rule already omitted. The court stayed the notice, holding that the jurisdictional challenge requires further examination.
The issue was whether a reassessment notice issued by a jurisdictional officer instead of a faceless officer is valid. The Court held it to be a fatal defect and quashed the notice.
The Court ruled that temporary business inactivity due to genuine medical reasons cannot justify cancellation without proper consideration. The impugned orders were declared arbitrary and set aside.
The Court held that challenges to ITC blocking cannot be entertained at the show cause stage. It ruled that adjudication must first take place based on facts and evidence.
The court held that issuing a single show cause notice for multiple financial years violates GST law. It ruled such “bunching” is impermissible and directed fresh year-wise notices.
The court held that the rectification order failed to satisfy the statutory requirements under Section 161 of the CGST Act. The impugned order was quashed, directing issuance of a fresh speaking order after considering the taxpayer’s reply.
