Goods and Services Tax : The Finance Act, 2025 retrospectively amended Section 17(5)(d) of the CGST Act after the Supreme Court allowed ITC on certain comm...
Corporate Law : The Supreme Court held that liabilities arising from corporate guarantees qualify as financial debt under Section 5(8) of the Inso...
Corporate Law : The Supreme Court ruled that a shortfall payment clause in a Deed of Hypothecation can qualify as a contract of guarantee under th...
Corporate Law : The Supreme Court expressed serious reservations about earlier rulings denying bail in UAPA cases, holding that smaller benches ca...
Income Tax : The article explains the Supreme Court’s landmark 2024 ruling that broken period interest on debt securities is capital in natur...
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...
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...
Corporate Law : Justice BR Gavai sworn in as India's 52nd Chief Justice. Focus areas include addressing case pendency and improving court infrastr...
Corporate Law : Key IBC case law updates from Oct-Dec 2024, covering Supreme Court and High Court decisions on CoC powers, resolution plans, relat...
Goods and Services Tax : The Supreme Court stayed further proceedings arising from a Section 74 GST order while examining whether writ petitions can be ent...
Finance : The Supreme Court refused relief to borrowers who defaulted from the very first instalment after availing an ₹8.09 crore loan. T...
Finance : The Supreme Court upheld a Will executed in favour of the testator’s sister despite objections from his wife and children. The C...
Income Tax : SC examined nature of amounts received from an AOP and upheld findings that receipts constituted profit share rather than revenue ...
Income Tax : The Supreme Court dismissed the challenge to a Delhi High Court ruling that quashed reassessment proceedings under Sections 148A(d...
Corporate Law : The Bill seeks to amend Articles 15 and 16 to allow reservation for backward classes proportionate to their population identified ...
Fema / RBI : RBI directs banks, NBFCs, and other entities to implement Supreme Court’s accessibility guidelines for digital KYC, ensuring inc...
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 : No restrictions on joint bank accounts or nominations for the queer community, as clarified by the Supreme Court and RBI in August...
Corporate Law : Supreme Court of India introduces new procedures for case adjournments effective 14th February 2024, detailing strict guidelines a...
Long pending dispute regarding constitutional validity of entry tax levied by various States has been settled by Hon ‘bless Supreme Court by its judgement delivered on 11.11.2016
Supreme Court upheld constitutional validity of Entry tax imposed by States. A nine-judge Constitution Bench, overrules ‘compensatory tax’ theory propounded by 7 judges bench
Section 54E of Income Tax Act,1961 does Not Make Any Distinction Between Depreciable Asset And Non-Depreciable Asset And, Therefore, The Exemption Available to the Depreciable Asset Under Section 54E Cannot Be Denied By Referring to the Fiction Created Under Section 50
Nominee of Deceased Member is absolutely entitled for the Ownership by transfer, Co-op. Soc can’t challenge the right of Nominee a settled Law of the land. No legal heirship, court order or succession certificate is required.
In the case of Mega Cabs Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union Of India & Ors. dated 03.06.2016 , Honorable Delhi High Court has Declared Rule 5A(2) of the Service Tax Rules, as amended, to the extent that it authorises the officers of the Service Tax Department, the audit party deputed by a Commissioner or the CAG […]
The High Court has dismissed the Writ Petition by the impugned judgment and order dated 2.9.2011. Being dissatisfied with the dismissal of his writ petition the appellant preferred a Review Petition which was also dismissed by the High Court by the impugned judgment and order dated 24.11.2011.
Honorable ble Supreme court held that Visveswaraiah Technological University being not wholly or substantially financed by government is not entitled to claim exemption u/s 10(23)(iiiab). Further, the fees collected by the University as per prescribed govt. norms cannot be said to finance provided by govt. Therefore, assistance by govt. by way of loans, grants and subsidies only to be considered as financing from it.
The business of the company was to lease its property and to earn rent and therefore, the income so earned should be treated as its business income. The High court was not correct while deciding that the income of the appellant should be treated as Income from House Property.
To recapitulate briefly, the assessee is a company as defined under Section 2(17) of the Act and is also in the business of operating qualifying ship(s). It is also not in dispute that it owns a qualifying ship and fulfillment of this condition permits the assessee to exercise its option for computation of income from the business of operating qualifying ships under Chapter XIIG of the Act.
Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the High Court was right in law in holding, that, the interest paid for broken period should not be considered as part of the purchase price, but should be allowed as revenue expenditure in the Year of purchase of securities.
