Electricity distribution companies were not entitled to collect gst from their customers and charges for metering equipment, testing fee for meter, labour charges from customers for shifting of meters, charges for bills and application for releasing connection of electricity were all integral part of services of distribution of electricity.
Gold and gold items seized from assessee were to be released after the orders-in-original had been passed in favour of assessees, on furnishing securities other than bank guarantees and execution of the bonds to the satisfaction of proper customs authority.
Andhra Pradesh High Court rejects Yogesh Gupta’s bail plea in AP TIDCO scam case. Full text of judgment and analysis. Learn about the legal implications.
Allahabad High Court declares proceedings invalid due to faulty initiation. In-depth analysis of the judgment in Wave Distilleries Breweries Ltd. v. State of U.P.
Allahabad High Court nullifies U.P. GST order against Viabhav Edible Pvt. Ltd., ruling no jurisdiction post-setting aside charges under Section 130.
Supreme Court held that period of limitation provided under section 61(2) of the IBC began from the date of upload of order in case where date of upload of order and date of pronouncement is not on same date.
ITAT Hyderabad held that as the parties have entered into registered Joint Development Agreement (JDA) on 04.04.2007 and the “Group of assessee” have also handed over possession to the TBPD pursuant to the agreement. Hence, transfer took place in the assessment year 2008-09.
Supreme Court held that promoter of the company are not disqualified per say under section 29A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (the Code) to dis-entitle him from presenting the resolution plan. Thus, promoters are eligible to submit resolution plan.
Calcutta High Court orders Customs to compensate petitioner for seized goods value. Analysis of illegal confiscation case and court’s directive.
Calcutta High Court held that provisional attachment of bank account under section 83 of the CGST Act based on tangible materials found against the petitioners during investigation is legal, valid and within jurisdiction.
