Once Income From AOP/BOI Is Included In Assessee's Taxable Income, Any Post-Tax Share Received Cannot Be Taxed Again: Madhya Pradesh High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court ruled that if an assessee has already included income from an Association of Persons (AOP) or Body of Individuals (BOI) in their taxable income, any post-tax share received from the AOP/BOI cannot be taxed again in the assessee's hands. The Division Bench of Justices Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Anuradha Shukla observed that “……the assessee was a member of an association of persons or body individuals, share of members of such association of persons...

GST Order Cannot Be Challenged Citing No Personal Hearing If Hearing Not Requested After Receipt Of SCN: MP High Court Dismisses Plea

The Madhya Pradesh High Court at its Indore bench, dismissed a writ petition which was filed by Future Consumer Limited, challenging an order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of State Tax under Section 73 of GST Act. The petitioner stated that they were denied the right to personal hearing under Section 75(4) of the Act. The division bench comprising of Justice Vivek Rusia and Justice Binod Kumar Dwivedi discussed on the petitioner's claim regarding fulfilment of procedural requirement for...

Deferred Payment Of Works Contract In 'Recovery Mode' Doesn't Exempt Dealer From Levy Under Commercial Tax Act And Entry Tax Act: Madhya Pradesh HC

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that merely because payment is deferred by the State in terms of the works contract, the same cannot be grounds for a dealer to seek exemption from payment of taxes under the MP Commercial Tax Act, 1994 and MP Entry Tax Act, 1976. In the case at hand, the Petitioner-company had entered into Build, Operate and Transfer (BOT) contract with the government for development of a by-pass road. As per the agreement, no explicit consideration was to be...

Customs Can't Claim Priority Over Bank For Recovery Of Dues From Assessee's Property: Madhya Pradesh High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has dismissed a petition moved by the Customs and Central Excise Department seeking priority over other secured creditors, for recovery of dues from an assessee's property. Justices Vivek Rusia and Binod Kumar Dwivedi relied on Punjab National Bank V/s Union of India and others (2022) where the Top Court had held that SARFAESI Act will have an overriding effect on the provisions of the Central Excise Act and therefore, dues of the secured creditor will...

Objections To Jurisdiction Of Arbitrator Raised U/S. 34 Must Not Be Rejected Only On Jurisdiction Without Touching Merits Of Case: Madhya Pradesh High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court bench comprising Justice Vivek Rusia and Justice Avanindra Kumar Singh has held that objections to the jurisdiction of the Arbitrator, which are raised in an application filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 must not be rejected only on the ground of jurisdiction, without touching the merit of the case. Brief Facts: M/s Lion Engineering Consultants Pvt. Ltd. (the Appellant) submitted its bid pursuant to a tender by the...

IPC Provisions Can't Be Invoked Directly Without Applying Penal Provisions Of GST Act: Madhya Pradesh High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court stated that GST authorities cannot bypass the procedural safeguards under the GST Act by directly invoking IPC provisions without first applying the penal provisions of the GST Act. The Division Bench of Justices Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Duppala Venkata Ramana observed that “GST Act, 2017 is a special legislation which holistically deals with procedure, penalties and offences relating GST and at the cost of repetition this court cannot emphasise...

Substantial Question Is Absent To Entertain Appeal U/s 260A: Madhya Pradesh HC Confirms Deletion Of Addition U/s 68

Finding that the legal principles have been properly applied by the Tribunal in appreciating the evidence and no substantial question has arisen for consideration, the Madhya Pradesh High Court confirmed the action of the Tribunal in deleting the additions made u/s 68. As per Section 68 of Income tax Act, where any sum is found credited in the book of an assessee maintained for any previous year, and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source thereof or the...

State Not Part To Agreement Can't File Section 16 Application: Madhya Pradesh High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court bench of Chief Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva and Justice Rajendra Kumar Vani has held that an arbitration agreement entered into between the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, Government of India, and a private company does not involve or implicate the State Government in any legal capacity. The bench held that such an agreement is exclusively between the central government ministry and the concerned company, thereby excluding any role or involvement of...

Arbitral Award Can Be Enforced Anywhere In Country Where Decree Is Executable: Madhya Pradesh High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court bench of Justice Dwarka Dhish Bansal has held that an award could be enforced through its execution in any location within the country where the decree could be executed. The High Court held that it is unnecessary to obtain a transfer of the decree from the Court that had jurisdiction over the arbitral proceedings. Brief Facts: Mahindra & Mahindra Financial Services Limited (the Applicant), who held the decree, filed a civil revision...

Parties Can't Be Forced To Arbitration If Arbitration Clause Unambiguously Requires Discretion Of Parties: Madhya Pradesh High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court bench of Justice Subodh Abhyankar held that parties could not be compelled to opt for arbitration when the agreement clearly left it to the discretion of the parties. A discretionary arbitration clause would require the mutual consent of all parties for the dispute to be referred to arbitration. Brief Facts: Late Yeshwant Boolani (“Deceased”) was a partner in M/s. Dhameja Home Industries, a partnership firm in which Sunil Dhameja (“Respondent No. 1”) and...

Section 31 Of Arbitration Act, 1940 Does Not Bar Court From Entertaining Applications Pre-Filing Of Award: Madhya Pradesh High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court bench of Justice Vishal Dhagat has held that there is no bar created by Section 31 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 that the court cannot entertain an application in respect of award until it has been filed. Section 31 of the Arbitration Act, of 1940, specifies the court jurisdiction for arbitration matters. It states that an award may be filed in any court with jurisdiction over the subject matter. It also states that all questions regarding the validity,...

Mere Initiation Of Proceedings Under IBC Doesn't Bar Liability Of Signatory Of Cheque Under Negotiable Instruments Act: Madhya Pradesh High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court bench of Justice Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia has held that merely because of the initiation of proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 the signatory of the cheque cannot escape from his liability under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Brief Facts: The Applicant approached the Madhya Pradesh High Court (“High Court”) and filed an application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking relief of the examination of records in a case pending...