Corporate Law : Supreme Court rules in Ashish Kakkar case that an arrest memo does not fulfill the legal requirement of furnishing grounds of arre...
Corporate Law : The Supreme Court quashed an FIR against MP Imran Pratapgadhi, emphasizing courts' and police's duty to protect freedom of speech ...
Corporate Law : Supreme Court acquits six in post-Godhra riots case, citing lack of incriminating evidence and wrongful conviction by the Gujarat ...
Corporate Law : Supreme Court advises High Courts to prioritize criminal appeals of elderly accused on bail, especially in old cases, to ensure fa...
Company Law : SC rules that NCLT cannot decide on public law matters under MMDR Act in IBC cases, reaffirming High Court jurisdiction under Arti...
Corporate Law : Key IBC case law updates from Oct-Dec 2024, covering Supreme Court and High Court decisions on CoC powers, resolution plans, relat...
Income Tax : Government addresses Supreme Court judgment on tax exemptions for clergy and its implications on Hindu Undivided Families (HUFs) u...
Corporate Law : Supreme Court rejects regularisation of illegal constructions, irrespective of occupancy or investments, and calls for action agai...
Corporate Law : The Supreme Court Collegium recommends three advocates—Ajay Digpaul, Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar, and Shwetasree Majumder—for ...
Corporate Law : SC rules on Special Court jurisdiction; NCLAT redefines financial debt; HC upholds IBBI regulations and addresses various insolven...
Corporate Law : SC held that a duly signed cheque, even if filled by someone other than drawer, can invoke Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments A...
Corporate Law : Supreme Court rules in Batliboi v HPCL that arbitral damages must reflect actual loss, not be a windfall. Discusses formulae flaws...
Income Tax : Supreme Court sets aside High Court ruling in S.M. Overseas tax case, restores ITAT order on reassessment under Sections 147/148 o...
Service Tax : Supreme Court allows Fork Media's exemption plea, seeks clarity on Cenvat Credit usage rejected earlier by High Court due to lack ...
Custom Duty : Supreme Court grants benefit of doubt to Gastrade International due to inconclusive evidence in HSD vs Base Oil classification dis...
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...
Corporate Law : Explore the updated FAQs on the implementation of the EPFO judgment dated 04.11.2022. Understand proof requirements, pension compu...
Income Tax : Comprehensive guide on CBDT's directives for AOs concerning the Abhisar Buildwell Supreme Court verdict. Dive into its implication...
The High Court held that there was nothing illegal in the issuance of the search warrant, the consequent search, the seizure during the search and taking over of the documents by the Income Tax Department under Section 132-A and dismissed the petition.
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.—These appeals by certificate granted by the High Court of Allahabad under section 66A(2) of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922, arise out of the judgment delivered and order passed on 3rd January, 1973, by the High Court of Allahabad in Income-tax Reference No. 450 of 1965. The following question of law had been referred to the High Court
Super Profits Tax Act, 1963 and Company’s (Profits) Sur-tax Act, 1964-Rule I of Second Schedule-Scope of- ‘Provision” and “Reserve’-Distinction- A sum of money transferred from current profits to general reserves- Dividend paid from that fund-General reserve how calculated.
Rule 24 of the Income Tax Rules, 1922 states that income derived from the sale of tea grown and manufactured by the seller shall be computed as if it were income derived from business and 40 per cent of such income shall be deemed to be income, profits and gains liable to tax.
If two reasonable constructions of a taxing provision are possible that construction which favours the assessee must be adopted. This is a well ‘accepted rule of construction recognised by this Court in several of its decisions.
Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India and others v Ogale glass Works 1971 AIR 2577 held that the award of industrial tribunal cannot stand in the way of enforcing the statutory provision cast on the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner under the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952.
In the Supreme Court of India. CIT west Bengal filed appeal before SC against the order of High Court and SC delivered judgement on 27.8.1971. The name of the assessee was Sh. Durga Parshad More.
The expression for the purpose of the business in s. 10(2)(xv) is wider than the expression for the purpose of earning profits. The former covers, not only the running of the business or its administration but also measures for the preservation of the business and protection of its assets and property.
Hirday Narain Vs. ITO (Supreme Court) Exercise of power to rectify an error apparent from the record is conferred upon the Income-tax Officer in aid of enforcement of a right. The Income-tax Officer is an officer concerned with assessment and collection of revenue, and the power to rectify the order of assessment conferred upon him to ensure that injustice to the assessee or to the Revenue may be avoided.
Section 132 does not confer any arbitrary authority upon the Revenue Officers. The Commissioner or the Director of Inspection must have, in consequence of information, reason to believe that the statutory conditions for the exercise of the power to order
