Income Tax : Dive into the Principle of Mutuality, exploring its meaning, tax implications, and impact on cooperative societies. Discover case ...
Fema / RBI : It is felt that enormous powers are conferred on Banks or Public Financial Institutions under SARFAESI Act, 2002 from the stage of...
Finance : I strongly believe that implementing the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 making a good balance between the object and the int...
Goods and Services Tax : Levy of sales tax on a higher percentage on ‘superior kerosene oil' (SKO) (also called white kerosene oil) and also levy of resa...
Income Tax : For the sake of convenience, the attached tables summarises the valuation rules for all perquisites prescribed in the new rule 3 e...
Income Tax : A dozen private nursing homes and hospitals today lost their approval granted under Section 17(2) of the Income Tax Act on the bas...
Income Tax : The case examined whether compensation paid to exit prior agreements was a sham arrangement. The Tribunal ruled it was a valid bus...
Corporate Law : Supreme Court held that negligence on part of bank in presentation of cheque within the validity period of cheque leads to ‘defi...
Company Law : Bombay High Court held that writ petition cannot be entertained in the face of availability of alternative remedy of approaching t...
Income Tax : In the absence of proper compliance with Section 65B and failure to establish a clear chain of custody, the digital evidence relie...
Corporate Law : The court analysed whether the reason account blocked falls within the scope of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. It ...
Income Tax : Circular No. 2/2010-Income Tax The Finance Act, 2005 introduced a levy namely Fringe Benefit Tax (FBT) on the value of certain fr...
Income Tax : Notification No. 94/2009 - Income Tax For the purpose of computing the income chargeable under the head Salaries, the value of pe...
CESTAT Mumbai held that demand of anti-dumping duty in terms of notification no. 15/2014-CUS(ABD) cannot be sustained since no evidences established that the goods were either manufactured or supplied from China or were routed through Taiwan after being supplied from China.
Orissa High Court held that writ against blocking of Input Tax Credit [ITC] under rule 86A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules [CGST Rules] not entertained as reply of the petitioner is pending adjudication. Accordingly, writ dismissed.
Jharkhand High Court held that bail application stands dismissed since the material collected shows that the petitioner is prima facie guilty of an offence under Prevention of Money Laundering matter. Accordingly, bail application rejected.
SC held writ petitions against ARC’s proposed SARFAESI action as not maintainable due to alternative remedy under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act.
Telangana High Court held that the whole auction proceedings are rightly vitiated since auction was done blatantly in violation of Rule 9(3) and Rule 9(4) of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002. Accordingly, writ dismissed.
Karnataka High Court granted bail for offence punishable under Section 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 [PML Act] taking into consideration the maximum punishment for the alleged offences and that there is no possibility of trial commencing in the near future.
Calcutta High Court held that fixed monthly AC charges is an essential component of “rent” thus rent goes beyond the ceiling limit and thus is excluded from the purview of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997. Hence, appellant is entitled to a decree of eviction.
Patna High Court held that High Courts should not entertain application under Article 226 of the Constitution, if there is an effective remedy available to the aggrieved persons under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act. Accordingly, writ held as not maintainable.
Madras High Court held that as per the provisions of Section 22 of Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, Debt Recovery Tribunal is not bound by the procedure laid down by the Code of Civil Procedure.
Madras High Court held that search conducted by Directorate of Enforcement at Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Ltd [TASMAC] under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act is lawful and cannot be termed as harassment.
