Category: Supreme Court
No disallowance u/s 43B for unpaid service tax unless actually received. Supreme Court dismisses the SLP of the Income Tax Department ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2827 (2019) (03) SC Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon by the parties Commissioner of IncomeTax v. Ovira Logistics P. Ltd 377 ITR …
High Court erred in dismissing appeal of Revenue as infructuous because respondent company had been struck off by the RoC – Supreme Court ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2825 (2019) (03) SC The instant appeal was filed by the appellant Revenue against the order of the High Court …
Prosecution of company directors in cheque bouncing case u/s 138 of NI Act. Supreme Court explains when High Court can quash petition u/s 482 of CrPC ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 2824 (2019) (03) SC Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon by the parties Gunamala Sales Private Limited vs. Anu Mehta and Ors., …
High Court erred in relying upon previously set aside order of Settlement Commission and making it a part of their order for issuing writ- SC ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 2813 (2019) (03) SC Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon by the parties Brij Lal & Ors. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, …
Assessee legally obliged to prove receipt of share capital/premium to the satisfaction of AO, failure of which justify addition – Supreme Court summarises emerging principles ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 2814 (2019) (03) SC Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon by the parties CIT v. Lovely Exports Pvt. Ltd (2008) …
Deduction u/s 80HH available out of gross profits before insertion of Section 80AB with effect from 1st April, 1981 –Supreme Court overrules its previous judgment ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2808 (2019) (03) SC Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon by the parties Motilal Pesticides (I) Pvt. Ltd. vs. …
Basic salary for PF deduction include allowances unless it is shown that employee had earned the extra amount beyond normal work which was otherwise required of them- SC ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 2807 (2019) (02) SC Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon by the parties Bridge and Roof Co. (India) Ltd. vs. Union of India, (1963) 3 SCR 978,Kichha …
Rule 12B of Excise Rules 2002–Aggregate of all clearances exceeding the limit prescribed in the exemption notification was liable to duty – Supreme Court ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2805 (2019) (02) SC Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon by the parties Gurupad Khandappa Magdum v. Hirabai Khandappa Magdum …
Income tax law on substantial question of law – Supreme Court explains options available before the High Court when no question of law is urged or framed ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 2803 (2019) (02) SC Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon by the parties State of Maharashtra vs. Vithal Rao Pritirao Chawan, (1981) 4 SCC 129, Jawahar Lal Singh vs. Naresh Singh & Ors., (1987) 2 SCC 222, State of U.P. …
Writ Petition was not maintainable against show cause notice on the issue of service tax classification as cargo handling service instead of goods transport agency–Supreme Court quashes High Court order ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 2802 (2019) (02) SC Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon by the parties Deputy Commissioner, …
