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 : Allahabad HC asserts that Section 498A IPC is often misused against entire families to exert pressure. Employment prospects should...
Corporate Law : The Orissa High Court ruled that voter ID alone is not reliable for determining age in insurance claims, directing LIC to reassess...
Corporate Law : Delhi High Court recent judgment highlights the alarming misuse of the POCSO Act, where cases are filed due to family objections t...
Corporate Law : J&K&L High Court quashes money laundering case against Farooq Abdullah, citing absence of a scheduled offence under the Prevention...
Corporate Law : Jharkhand HC directs the state to use its Special Branch to identify illegal immigrants allegedly from Bangladesh in six districts...
Corporate Law : SC rules on Special Court jurisdiction; NCLAT redefines financial debt; HC upholds IBBI regulations and addresses various insolven...
Goods and Services Tax : HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA: Ramesh Kumar Patodia v. Citi Bank [WPO NO. 547 OF 2019 JUNE 24, 2022 ] Facts: ♦ Petitioner is a holder ...
Goods and Services Tax : CGST, Gurugram (Anti Evasion) Vs Gaurav Dhir (Chief Judicial Magistrate, District Courts, Gurugram) U/s 132(1)) r/w 132(1)(b)(C)(e...
Corporate Law : In order to dispense with the physical signatures on the daily orders (which are not important/final orders and judgments) of the ...
Custom Duty : Delhi High Court admits petition questioning Validity of provisions in Finance Act 2022 which overruled landmark Judgment of Supr...
Income Tax : Bombay High Court held that amount paid towards community services and social welfare under Memorandum of Settlement under the Ind...
Goods and Services Tax : Sri Avantika Contractors (I) Limited. Vs Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling (GST) and others. (Telangana High Court) Telangana...
Custom Duty : Delhi HC reduces pre-deposit requirement for Shubh Impexs appeal in customs duty dispute over imported goods classification....
Corporate Law : Bombay HC upholds priority of Janaseva Sahakari Bank's secured interest over Sales Tax Dept’s claims, setting aside the mutation...
Income Tax : Delhi High Court quashes reassessment notices for AYs 2013-14 and 2014-15, citing procedural lapses and lack of valid grounds unde...
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...
Corporate Law : Delhi High Court has exempted the Lawyers from wearing Gowns practicing in the High Court with effect from March 2, 2022 till furt...
Corporate Law : Till further orders, all documents/ not summons/Daks through physical mode be dispensed with, except where there, is a specific or...
Income Tax : Hon’ble Judges to hear the matters physically at the Principal Seat at Bombay, on experimental basis with effect from 1st Decemb...
India Awake For Transparency Vs Union of India (Delhi High Court) Conclusion: Assessment of qualifications, experience, etc. as eligibility conditions of a candidate was purely the domain of the Executive and the Selection Committees. Assessee had been unable to make out a case, which would lead to a conclusion that the Authority of NCLAT Technical […]
CIT Vs South Indian Bank Ltd (Kerala High Court) Facts- The AO through the assessment order disallowed the claim of the assessee under Section 36(1)(viia). Similarly, the AO disallowed the revaluation of unquoted securities adopted by the assessee. The appeal of the appellant before the Commissioner (Appeals) was allowed in part. Further, in the appeal […]
HC quashed the cancellation of GST registration order as no opportunity of hearing was accorded. Further, said that the denial of opportunity of hearing to the assessee as is mandated in the first proviso to Section 29(2) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act) vitiates the proceedings as well as the orders cancelling the registration.
The portion of the observations that are highlighted would reflect on the professional conduct of the petitioner, argues his counsel; learned Panel Counsel appearing for the respondents opposes the writ petition contending that the said observations are case specific and therefore petitioner may not read too much in that; so contending he seeks dismissal of the writ petition.
Avon Udhyog Vs State of Rajasthan (Rajasthan High Court) Suspension of a registration of an assessee has its own consequences – it brings the entire business of an assessee to a stand still. In a way it is worse than cancellation. Against cancellation, an assessee can take legal remedies but against suspension pending an enquiry, […]
Tarakeswar Estate Vs Union of India & Ors. (Calcutta High Court) The petitioner has challenged the impugned assessment order dated 20th March, 2021 under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 relating to assessment year 2018-2019, mainly on the ground of violation of principle of natural justice as well as total non-application of mind […]
Premprakash Bansal Vs State of Maharashtra (Bombay High Court) Heard learned Counsel for the parties. 2. Apprehending arrest in Crime No. 0178 of 2021 registered with APMC Police Station, Navi Mumbai for the offences punishable under Section 420, 406 and 34 of the I.P.C, Applicant seeks pre-arrest bail. 3. On 10th August, 2021, this Court declined […]
S.R. Steel Vs State of U.P. (Allahabad High Court) In the peculiar facts of the present case as have been noted above, we lift the bar of alternative remedy as we find that the petitioner’s GST registration was cancelled without issuance of any prior show cause notice. Also, the delay is largely on account of […]
Parag Kishorchandra Shah vs. NFAC W.P. NO.11052 OF 2021 dated 27.10.21 Bombay HC Brief Facts of The Case i) Order dated 20.04.21 passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s 144B; ii) Assessee had been filing responses to notices u/s 142(1); iii) Last 142(1) issued on 14.02.21 which was replied on 24.02.21; iv) On 17.04.21(Saturday) at 02:43 PM A […]
The order is bad in law. This we say so, for two reasons- (a) violation of principles of natural justice, i.e. Fair opportunity of hearing. No sufficient time was afforded to the petitioner to represent his case; (b) order passed in nature, does not assign any sufficient reasons even decipherable from the record, as to how the officer could determine the amount due and payable by the assessee.
