Judgements and Orders, Supreme Court and High courts of India

The CESTAT, Ahmedabad in the matter of Ambica Engineering Works v. C.C.E. & S.T.-Surat-I [Excise Appeal No. 10859 of 2020, dated June 7, 2022] set aside the demand order has held that invoking extended limitation period by the Revenue Department cann

The AAAR, Maharashtra in Dubai Chamber of Commerce and Industry [Order No. MAH/AAAR/AM-RM/08/2022-23 dated June 23, 2022] has modified the order of the AAR, to the extent that, the activities performed by the Liaison Office ("LO") acting as link for

THE MADRAS HIGH COURT has ruled that proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016 cannot dilute the rights of the Income Tax Department to reopen the assessment under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

This is a Writ Petition under Articles 226 / 227 of the Constitution of India. Initially the writ petition was filed seeking a direction to the respondents for a declaration that adjudication of the show-cause notices dated 01.06.2006 and 28.11.2006

This judgement will be helpful in similar disputes where the job work services or man power services are subject matter of dispute. The Apex Court in this case depends on terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties and found that there

A contract of guarantee is of between three persons Creditor, Debtor and the Surety. The Contract of Guarantee generally made to protect interest of the creditor and provide him trust and security for payment of debt advanced to the Corporate Debtor.

The Apex Court in this case held that since there was no intimation of delay or lodging of claim and volition of clause 6(i) of the insurance policy in the repudiation letter. The insurer also disowned its claim of late intimation of claim by appoint

The Odisha High Court observed that there was no documentary evidence to support the fact that JSW ISD Maharashtra has been awarded with the contract in the State of Odisha, and that the tax was deposited by JSW Odisha on behalf of JSW ISD Maharashtr

The Hon’ble High Court disposed the writ petitions in favour of taxpayer by setting aside the aforesaid impugned orders and remanding these cases to consider afresh

The CESTAT, Ahmedabad in Mr. Anil Dudalal Kaneria v. C.C.E.-Bharuch [Excise Appeal No.10079 of 2019] has held that a huge personal penalty cannot be imposed on the Chairman of the Company who is not looking after the accounts of the goods manufacture