The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in Abhi Engineering Corporation Pvt. Ltd. And Anr. v. Union of India and Ors. [Writ Petition (L) No. 5842 of 2020 decided on February 9, 2021] held that where the proceedings under Section 74 of the Central Goods and Ser
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Paramvir Singh Saini v. Baljit Singh & Others [Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 3543 of 2020 dated December 2, 2020] directed installation of CCTV- Camera at investigation agencies offices and police stat
The Hon'ble AAAR, Karnataka, in the matter of M/S. Ncs Pearson Inc.,[Order No. KAR/AAAR/07/2020-21 (dated, November 13, 2020)] held that,the scoring done by the human scorer is to be regarded as being within the realm of minimum human intervention.Se
The Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of Quality Enterprises v. Assistant State Tax Officer [W.P. (C) No. 18212 of 2020 dated September 18, 2020] has held that bank guarantee shall not be encashed till such time where assessee preferred appeal ag
The Hon'ble National Anti-Profiteering Authority (NAA), in the case of DGAP vs. Hardcastle Restaurants [Case No. 79/2020 datedDecember 9, 2020] held that, the Hardcastle Restaurants ("Respondent") has committed an offence by denying the benefit of
The Hon'ble HC, Rajasthan in the matter of Ravindra Singh Chaudhary vs. Union of India [D. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 20779/2019 dated October 16, 2020] held that Dream11's online fantasy sports games are not betting/gambling.
These appeals by assessee are arising out of the common order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-17, Mumbai in Appeal No. CIT(A)-17 wherein penalties u/s. 271G were confirmed for A.Ys. 2012-13, 2013-13 & 2014-15.
The Hon’ble HC, Rajasthan in Paridhi Jain v. State [S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 742/2020, 48/2020 dated January 20, 2020]after considering the fact that fact that the Petitioner being a practising Chartered Accountant and a lady
Bogus Sales/ Purchases: Addition solely on the basis of information received from the sales-tax department is not sustainable. Suspicion of the highest degree cannot take the place of evidence.
The Hon’ble Apex Court held that even though the goods were found to be different, payment of duty taking comparative value was done with bona fide belief. When entire exercise was revenue neutral (i.e. credit of duty paid on captive consumption was