Petitioner contended that disputes regarding insolvency and winding up are non-arbitrable. However, HC noted that objections to arbitrator’s jurisdiction could be raised before arbitral tribunal itself.
The court examined the legal provisions and previous judgments, emphasizing the disqualification of an arbitrator with an interest in the outcome of the dispute. It noted that the unilateral appointment of the arbitrator by the Government of Kerala, a party to the dispute, violated legal principles established by the Supreme Court. Therefore, the appointment was deemed legally invalid.
In the case of Principal Commissioner of Custom Vs Khan Sadaf, the Supreme Court of India dealt with the issue of whether the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) had the jurisdiction to entertain an application for compounding of an offence under Section 137 of the Customs Act, 1962.
Shanno Mohammed Yusuf Warsi Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) The case of Shanno Mohammed Yusuf Warsi Vs Income Tax Officer (ITO) at the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Mumbai revolves around the taxation of long-term capital gains (LTCG) from penny stock transactions, specifically involving shares of Essar (India) Ltd. The central question is whether the assessee […]
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) approved the Resolution Plan, emphasizing the paramount importance of the CoC’s commercial wisdom in such matters. The approval included various directions regarding the plan’s implementation, extinguishment of existing shares, reliefs, amendments to MoA and AoA, and cessation of the moratorium.
Section 54F nowhere envisages that sale consideration obtained by assessee from original capital asset is mandatorily required to be utilized for purposes of meeting cost of new asset. Section 54 Exemption allowable despite start of construction of new house before sale of old house
Explore the intricacies of Section 40A(2)(b) with insights from the M S Hostel Vs DCIT case. Learn why salary disallowance requires thorough examination of fair market value and legitimate business needs.
Read about Pahari Mata Sahkari Awas Samiti Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Lucknow). The Commissioner (Appeals) cannot dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution and must decide on merits.
Assessee was incorporated in Japan and was in the business of providing telecommunication services. Assessee provided fixed, mobile, wholesale, and associated telecommunication services across the globe.
Assessee had issued share application money and subsequently allotted shares which showed that the transactions were genuine and there was no material brought on record by tax authorities that the assessee had benefited from round-tripping, therefore, ITAT had deleted the addition made u/s 68.
