All High Courts
'Was Returning From Mecca': Delhi High Court Orders Customs To Release Woman's Gold Jewellery, Says 24 Kt Purity Not Grounds For Seizure
The Delhi High Court has ordered the Customs Department to release the gold jewellery which was seized from a Muslim woman while she was returning from a religious pilgrimage to Mecca.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta observed that it is normal practice in our country for women to wear basic jewellery and the same cannot be seized by the Customs...
Revisional Authority U/S 264 Of Income Tax Act Can Only Review Existing Orders, Cannot Issue Directions To Assessing Authority: Kerala HC
The Kerala High Court stated that the powers of revisional authority under Section 264 of the Income Tax Act is confined to reviewing existing orders, and the authority cannot issue directions to the assessing authority. Section 264 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 empowers the Principal Chief Commissioner, Chief Commissioner, Principal Commissioner, or Commissioner to revise...
Department Serving Notice Via WhatsApp Post-COVID Is Not Valid U/S 169 CGST Act: Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court stated that notice via WhatsApp was permitted only during COVID-19 pandemic and is not a valid mode of service under Section 169 CGST Act. Section 169 of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017, outlines various methods for serving notices, orders, or communications under the GST law. Justices Nitin Jamdar and Basant Balaji was addressing the...
Issues Of Misjoinder Of Parties & Incorporation By Reference Fall Within Purview Of Arbitral Tribunal: Calcutta High Court
The Calcutta High Court Bench of Justice Shampa Sarkar, while allowing an application for appointment of arbitrator has observed that the issues of misjoinder/non-joinder of parties and whether the arbitration clause contained in the principal agreement was incorporated by reference in a subsequent agreement by the successors-in- interest would fall within the domain of the...
Kerala High Court Upholds Triple Tax On Unauthorised Construction Due To Lack Of Proof Of Deemed Permit
The Kerala High Court has upheld triple tax on unauthorised construction due to lack of proof of deemed permit. Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. stated that “in the absence of any documents indicating the submission of application for permit and inaction on the part of the Panchayat in considering the said application, the contention of the assessee as to the deemed permit cannot...
Appeal On Service Classification Under 'Insurance Auxiliary Service' Not Maintainable Before High Court: Calcutta High Court
The Calcutta High Court stated that an appeal on service classification under 'insurance auxiliary service' not maintainable before the High Court. Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das) was addressing the appeal filed by the department/appellant under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994 challenging...
Gram Panchayat Cannot Levy Property Tax On Industrial Establishment Within Notified Industrial Areas: Karnataka High Court
The Karnataka High Court has held that the Gram Panchayat cannot levy or collect property taxes in respect of Industrial establishments located within areas notified by the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (KIADB). Mere execution of a lease-cum-sale agreement or any administrative communication cannot vest power in the Gram Panchayat to levy tax in the absence of express delegation...
Reward Schemes Must Be Fairly Implemented: Bombay High Court Directs Dept To Pay Informer For Assisting In Tax Recovery
The Bombay High Court has directed the department to pay informer for assisting in tax evasion recovery. Justices M.S. Sonak and Jitendra Jain stated that “If the Government has formulated a reward scheme, it must be implemented fairly and transparently. Informers who take risks and invest time must not be made to run from pillar to post to secure what may be due and payable....
No Leniency In Import/Export Lapses; Bombay High Court Upholds Licence Cancellation Of Courier Agency For Clearing Imports Without Authorisation
The Bombay High Court has upheld the licence cancellation of a courier agency for clearing imports without authorisation by stating that any such exercise of discretion of leniency will only encourage persons to commit the offence by taking recourse to the services of the courier agencies. Justices M.S. Sonak and Jitendra Jain stated that “the petitioner has been negligent in...
Mandate Of Arbitrator Can Be Terminated For Delay In Passing Award Despite Absence Of Automatic Termination Clause In NSE Bye-Laws: Delhi HC
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh has held that although the National Stock Exchange (NSE) Bye Laws do not provide for the automatic termination of the Arbitrator's mandate after the expiry of the time period stipulated under Bye Law 7(b) of the NSE Bye Laws, the mandate of the Arbitrator can be terminated by the Relevant Authority if the Arbitrator fails to pass the...
Benefits To Registered Retail Traders Under MSMED Act Limited To Priority Sector Lending, Not Eligible For QCO Exemption: Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court held that the benefits to registered retail traders under MSMED Act, 2006 (Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006) limited to priority sector lending only, and are not eligible for QCO [Plywood and Wooden flush door shutters (Quality Control) Order, 2024] exemption. Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. stated that “the entire category of wholesale...
Amendment To Bring Additional Grounds U/S 34 Of A&C Act Is Maintainable If Objections Are Not Beyond Judicial Scrutiny Of Court: Delhi HC
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri while hearing amendment petition filed u/s 34 of the A&C Act observed that the omission to plead a ground of challenge in the original Section 34 petition pertaining to non-adherence to the mandatory procedure of Section 29A would not oust the jurisdiction of the Section 34 Court to scrutinize the same. The Court held that...