Bombay High Court held that re-assessment proceedings, in absence of any failure to disclose any material fact and without any new tangible material which was not available at the time of passing of the original assessment order, is unsustainable.
NCLT Delhi ordered initiation of CIRP as petition filed u/s. 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 by Financial Creditor is complete in all respect and it is clearly established that the Corporate Debtor is in default of a debt more than the minimum amount stipulated u/s. 4 (1) of the Code
Ayann Traders Vs State of U.P. And 3 Others (Allahabad high court) It is a case where taxing authorities, after intercepting the goods of the petitioner on 18.04.2018, had detained the same and issued notice to both the selling and purchasing dealer. When no reply was filed, a seizure order was passed imposing 100% penalty, […]
Dhanraj Chhipa Vs PCIT (ITAT Jodhpur) CIT cannot invoke his powers of revision under section 263 if the Assessing Officer has conducted enquiries and applied his mind and has taken a possible view of the matter. If there was any enquiry and a possible view is taken, it would not give occasion to the Commissioner […]
SPS Steels Rolling Mills Limited and Ors. Vs Asansol Durgapur Development Authority and Anr. (Calcutta High Court) Learned Single Judge by the impugned order has reached to the conclusion that the transfer fee was exempted under the resolution plan sanctioned by the National Company Law Tribunal and has found that the demand of the respondent […]
ITAT Delhi held that there is no copyright on live events, and therefore, the fee received towards live transmission cannot be taxed as royalty in terms of Section 9(l)(vi).
Madras High Court held that Government Order No. 339/Public (Law Officers) fixing fees for the law officers is extremely irrational. Government Orders determining a ceiling as fees for a professional cannot be accepted by any court of law.
NCLT Kolkata held that just because a creditor enjoys security interest, it cannot be treated higher than other creditors who have financed the Corporate Debtor.
NCLT Ahmedabad held that conjoint reading of Section 30 & Section 53 of IBC shows that the Financial Creditors are placed at a higher priority than Operational Creditors. Hence, as the Financial Creditors have not been paid in full, the Operational Creditors cannot claim a higher amount.
Signatories/directors cannot escape from their penal liability under Section 138 of NI Act by citing its dissolution. What is dissolved, is only company, not personal penal liability of accused covered under Section 141 of NI Act.
