These judgements are uploaded by our esteemed readers. If you have a judgement on an important topic that you would like to share with others, please use this form to upload it
J. Kumar Infraprojects Ltd. v. DCIT (ITAT Mumbai)
Mumbai Tribunal : S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Salary paid to staff/ spouse and professional fees-Disallowance is restricted to 30%.[S. 40(a)(ia),143(3)] The AO disallowed the salary paid to spouse of the employees. The CIT(A) restricted the disallowances to 30 % of gross receipts. The Tribunal afformed the order of the CIT(A). (ITA Nos. 4147 to 4153 & 4585 to… Read More ...
Western Arch Developers v. Pr. CIT (Bombay High Court)
Bombay High Court: S. 119: Central Board of Direct Taxes-Profits and gains from housing projects-Condonation of delay-Genuine hardship-Delay in filing of return of income-Genuine hardship-Claim for deduction under section 80IBA-Delay of 45 days due to illness of managing partner- Rejection not justified. [S. 80IBA, 119(2(b), 139, Art. 226] The assessee, a partnership firm engaged in construction, received a… Read More ...
Skyway Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd v. DCIT (Bombay High Court)
Bombay High Court: S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal-Duties-ITAT has not dealt with the issue of Document Identification Number (DIN)-Failure to decide Cross objection-Search-Assessment order without-Not uploaded on portal before limitation-Violation of CBDT Circular No. 19 of 2019 dt. 14th August, 2019-Bogus purchases-Un secured loan-Assessment was not uploaded on Portal before the expiry of limitation-Screen shots-Miscellaneous application was rejected… Read More ...
Manish Kumar vs Directorate General, Goods & Service Tax Intelligence, Zonal Unit, Ludhiana (P&H High Court)
P&H High Court: GST Act: Dept is carrying out abrupt arrests driven by some inexplicable urgency rather than necessity. However, it does not pursue the trial with the same urgency. The slow-paced trials is symptomatic of a systemic problem (i) The GST regime was implemented on 01.07.2017 and interestingly, since its commencement, only a solitary conviction has been… Read More ...
PCIT vs. ZULU MERCHANDISE PRIVATE LIMITED (Calcutta High Court)
Calcutta High Court: Bogus Capital Gains from Penny Stocks: Surrounding circumstances have to be taken note of & the test of human probabilities have to be applied. Though the shares were sold in the normal course of business through shares brokers in Demat Form in stock exchanges & payment were made through banking channel, the capital gains can… Read More ...
Puneet Batra vs UOI (Delhi High Court)
Delhi High Court: An Advocate cannot be subjected to harassment by a search and seizure conducted at his office unless and until there is some material for the GST Department to show that the advocate himself is not merely representing his client but is also personally involved in the alleged illegality. For the said purpose, some prima facie… Read More ...
Krishnagopal B. Nangpal v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Bombay High Court)
Bombay High Court: Sale proceeds of one residential house, used for purchase of multiple residential houses qualifies for exemption under Section 54(1) of the Income-tax Act prior to its amendment by Finance (No. 2) Act, 2014 (i) The amendment brought in by Finance (No.2) Act 2014 to section 54 makes the position clear that after the amendment, the… Read More ...
IL&FS Financial Services Ltd. v. Adhunik Meghalaya Steels Pvt. Ltd. (Supreme Court)
SUPREME COURT: Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. S. 7: Initiation of corporate insolvency resolution process-Limitation-Acknowledgement of debt-Balance sheet entries-Validity of acknowledgment under S. 18 of the Limitation Act even where name of creditor is not specifically mentioned-Liberal interpretation-Prior financial statements and cash flow disclosures may be relied on- Substantive jural relationship and continuing liability inferred- COVID-19 extension-Applicability… Read More ...
State of Haryana v. Satender Kumar Antil & Anr. (SUPREME COURT)
SUPREME COURT: Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. (BNSS) S. 35 : When police may arrest without warrant-Notice by Investigating Agency-Inquiry-Electronic communication-Liberty of individual involved-Cannot be served via WhatsApp or electronic communication-Standing order must follow CrPC/BNSS modes only -Application to modify earlier order rejected-State must ensure personal service-Application dismissed. [S. 2(i), 2(k), 35(3), 35(4), 35(5), 35(6),39, 63, 64(2),… Read More ...
Arun Fatehpuria & Anr. v. Tarachand Tholia (HUF) (Rajasthan High Court)
Rajasthan High Court : Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 S. 9 : Eviction of tenants-Partnership firm-Tenancy created in individual capacity-Non-joinder of firm or other partners immaterial-Landlord’s bona fide need proved-Tenant cannot dictate choice of premises-Writ not maintainable-Petition dismissed. [S. 2(i),21, Succession Act, 1956, Order 6 Rule 17 CPC, Order 14 Rule 5, 30 CPC, Ss. 2(i), 21, Art. 226]… Read More ...