The petitioner challenged the issuance of one notice for multiple years and questioned the validity of the resulting orders. The High Court stayed the operation of the impugned orders pending further consideration.
The High Court revisited reassessment disputes after the Supreme Court took note of the retrospective insertion of Section 147A. The matters were remanded for fresh consideration with liberty to challenge the amended provision.
The Delhi High Court held that in a prosecution under the Official Secrets Act, sensitive classified documents need not be supplied as copies. Inspection of the documents was considered sufficient to protect the accused’s right to a fair trial.
The petitioner argued that each assessment year requires separate consideration, including limitation aspects. The High Court issued notice and stayed further adjudication.
The Court held that ITC cannot be denied merely because the sellers registration was cancelled retrospectively. A purchaser is entitled to rely on a valid registration existing at the time of transaction.
Jeel Kandla Service & Anr. Vs Union of India and Ors. (Calcutta High Court) The appeal arose from a judgment of a Single Judge dismissing a writ petition challenging an order of the Regional Director, Eastern Region, Ministry of Corporate Affairs, which had permitted shifting the registered office of a company from West Bengal to […]
The petitioner challenged a single Section 74 GST notice issued for FY 2018-19 to FY 2023-24. The High Court issued notice and stayed the passing of the final order pending further proceedings.
Smt. Jayamma W/O. Late Sri. Kalegowda Vs Directorate of Enforcement (Karnataka High Court) The Karnataka High Court considered a challenge to a provisional attachment order issued by the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) under Section 5 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA). The petitioner contended that the ED had failed to comply with […]
The Court held that once the GSTAT became functional and appeal timelines were extended, disputes should be pursued before the statutory forum. The petitioner was directed to comply with the pre-deposit requirement under Section 112(8).
ITAT Hyderabad held that an addition based solely on discrepancies in unaudited Tally-generated statements was unsustainable. The Tribunal accepted the audited financial statements and ordered deletion of the ₹36.5 lakh addition.
