Madhav Govind Dhulshete Vs ITO (Bombay High Court) Section 40A is inserted in Income Tax Act with an aim and object to discourage payment of money in cash beyond a certain limit. That is to encourage cheque transactions and banking operations. Thus, in these circumstances, Assessing Officer is correct in making disallowance of Rs. 36,16,500 […]
Consulting Engineering Services India Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) It is true that noticed dated 21.11.2011 was for both the A.Ys i.e. 2008-09 and 2009-10. However, each A.Y is considered to be a separate unit and, therefore, for each A.Y, the Assessing Officer must bring out his case. A perusal of the said notice, […]
Integrated Tech 9 Labs (P) Ltd. Vs State of U.P. & Ors. (Allahabad High Court) In case we allow the petitioner to challenge the said order in this writ petition it would amount to filing of successive writ petitions for one of the causes of action involved in the earlier writ petition. It is settled […]
Observing that there is no ground as to why a person filing Form GST TRAN-2 should not be allowed to correct and file such revised form, Calcutta High Court has allowed filing of revised Form GST TRAN-2.
Mr. R.K. Ojha, learned counsel appears on behalf of the counsel for the appellants and submits that the learned counsel for the appellants is not present in the Court today. It is stated that he is out of station. This is no ground to seek adjournment. We therefore reject the request for adjournment. We have asked the learned counsel to argue the matter. He submits that he does not know anything about the case.
Optival Health Solutions Pvt Ltd Vs UOI (Calcutta High Court) Petitioners have sought a direction upon the respondents to allow them to revise/rectify their Form GST TRAN-2 electronically or manually – Petitioners contend that the present scheme of things does not allow rectification or revision of the TRAN-2 form and such a lacuna violates Article […]
Thereafter, this Court has decided the matter and upheld the vires of section 139AA of the Income Tax Act. In view thereof, linkage of PAN with Aadhar is mandatory.
Shri Vikas Yashwant Khare Vs Shri Makarand M Lele (Board of Discipline, ICSI) The Board of Discipline of the Institute of Company Secretaries of India ( ICSI ) has dismissed a complaint filed against the former President CS Makarand Lele alleging several misconduct charges. A complaint was lodged against CS Makarand Lele alleging that by […]
Union of India Vs Mr. Mukesh Maneklal Choksi (National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench) Since Respondent No 1, Mr Mukesh Maneklal Choksi, Statutory Auditor , colluded with the Chairman/Director of R-2 company and has given a false Audit certificate relating to the Profit & Loss Account and Balance Sheet of the R-2 company, without even […]
Hindustan Unilever Limited Vs Union of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court) The issue pertains to Anti Profiteering order passed against HUL whereunder it was directed to deposit Rs.233 Crores. In the Writ Petition filed against the said order, the Delhi HC passed the following interim orders In view of the submissions and contentions raised, […]
