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 : Bombay HC held that a 21-year-old woman cannot be compelled to return home or marry against her wishes, treating residence, marria...
Corporate Law : The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that judicial officers cannot be intimidated for delivering judgments since every judicial orde...
Corporate Law : The article argues that failure to comply before the AO or CIT(A) can lead to adverse assessments, as higher forums generally cann...
Corporate Law : The Bombay High Court held that merely organising protests or morchas against government decisions cannot justify externment. It r...
Corporate Law : The Delhi High Court held that an unnatural death in police custody attracts constitutional liability under Article 21, even if ca...
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...
Income Tax : Bombay HC quashed Section 148 notices, holding that search-based material required proceedings under Sections 153A/153C, not Secti...
Income Tax : Karnataka HC held Section 147 reopening invalid where seized material from a third-party search required proceedings under Section...
Income Tax : Gujarat HC quashed reassessment and penalty orders issued against a deceased person, holding proceedings concluded against a dead ...
Corporate Law : Andhra Pradesh HC held that AI-generated fake citations alone do not invalidate a judicial order if the correct legal principles a...
Income Tax : Bombay HC quashed Section 148 reopening for AY 2013-14, holding Section 43CA was inapplicable and stamp duty valuation alone could...
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 remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer since non-response to notice issued under section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act by the petitioner was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause.
Allahabad High Court quashed a GST registration cancellation order citing lack of valid reasons, violations under Section 29(2), and denial of personal hearing.
Allahabad HC set aside the GST demand and penalty in Party Time Hospitality Vs State of U.P. case, remanding it for fresh hearing in accordance with GST Act.
Allahabad HC: Excess stock findings during surveys under GST cannot invoke Section 130 without proven tax evasion intent. Tax determination under Section 73/74 applies.
Madras High Court held that the coinsurance premium and re-insurance commission would not be considered as supply and hence not liable to pay GST. Thus, amount deposited by petitioners are entitled for refund.
The petitioner, aggrieved by the Assessment Order filed an appeal before the Commissioner’s Office and it is submitted that the appeal is presently pending but no effective order has been passed thereon.
These orders arises out of demand notice dated 3/3/2011 issued by respondent no.2 calling upon the Federation to pay an amount of Rs.14,21,145/- and to deposit the same to the credit of respective EPF accounts of the employees of the Federation.
Petitioners sought for an adjournment requesting relevant papers to examine the legality of the personal hearing notice. Respondent No.3 furnished documents most of which were handwritten and illegible.
In my view, having regard to the facts and circumstances, the statutory authority was bound to afford a personal hearing to the petitioner through video conferencing as mentioned above. The result of this infraction would be that the impugned orders will have to be set aside.
The application preferred by the petitioner for recall of the said order was also rejected by the Supreme Court vide order dated 25.10.2019. It is thereafter that petitioner-assessee preferred a review petition.
