Tax Management India .com TMI - Tax Management India. Com   
 

Highlights Articles SMS News Notifications Circulars Forum Cases

Highlights / Annotations:

More Highlights


Case Laws:

Income Tax W. Tax Service Tax C. Excise Customs VAT Corp. Laws FEMA Allied

  • 2015 (8) TMI 1219 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

    Serco BPO Private Limited Versus Authority for Advance Rulings New Delhi and others.

    Income Tax: Taxation of income from dividents and capital gains under the Indo-Mauritius Double Tax Avoidance Convention - Application for advance ruling - Whether the capital gains arising in the hands of Blackstone GPV Capital Partners Mauritius V-B Ltd. (‘Blackstone Mauritius’) and Barclays (H&B) Mauritius Limited (‘Barclays Mauritius’) (Collectively referred to as the ‘Sellers’) on account of the sale of shares of SKR BPO Services Private Limited is not chargeable to tax having regard Article 13(4) of t.....

  • 2015 (8) TMI 1218 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT

    RAMESH C PRAJAPATI Versus DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

    Income Tax: Agricultural income - assessee has shown income of ₹ 12,12,220/- being income from agriculture activities but A.O. has considered income of ₹ 7,50,000/- to be as business income - Tribunal reversing the well reasoned order of C.I.T. (Appeals) and in sending the matter back to the Assessing Officer - Held that:- No basis has been spelled out by the A.O. to arrive at the conclusion that out of total income declared by assessee, part of income was business income. We also find that no e.....

  • 2015 (8) TMI 1217 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

    The Commissioner of Income Tax, The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Versus M/s. Hewlett-Packard Globalsoft Pvt. Ltd.

    Income Tax: Reopening of assessment - Eligibility of the income derived from rendering technical services abroad to be eligible for deduction under Section 10-A or not - Held that:- As from the original assessment records that the claim of the assessee under Section 10A of the Act was thoroughly scrutinized, the assessing Officer had examined the claim of expenditure incurred in foreign currency for providing technical services by allocating the sum of ₹ 38,51,45,781/- between the five STP units in th.....

  • 2015 (8) TMI 1216 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

    Paras Shantilal Shah, Pragna R. Shah, Priti Paras Shah, Late Shri Rajendra Shantilal Shah Through His L.R. Paras Shah Versus The Dy. C.I.T.S.R. 48, Mumbai

    Income Tax: Seized jewellery - unaccounted income of the appellant - documentary evidence found at the time of search to show that part of it belonged to the appellants father, late mother and the minor children who were wealth-tax and income-tax assessees in the earlier years - Held that:- It is not disputed that the valuation report indicates the name of the father and mother as being the persons who claim to be the owner of the jewellery. The mother of the appellant passed away far back as 1990. In the n.....

  • 2015 (8) TMI 1215 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

    The Commissioner of Income Tax-3 Versus M/s. Reliance Industrial Infrastructure Ltd

    Income Tax: Higher rate of depreciation @ 40% - assessee was engaged in the business of letting out assets on hire - Held that:- Decided against revenue and in favour of the respondent-assessee as decided in assessee own case [2011 (6) TMI 737 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] - Decided against revenue. Lease equalization credited to P&L Account over and above the lease rental - Tribunal held it cannot be considered as income and thereby upholding reducing of assessee's total income by lease equalization - Held that.....

  • 2015 (8) TMI 1214 - KERALA HIGH COURT

    Grihalakshmi Vision Versus The Additional Commissioner of Income Tax

    Income Tax: Penalty levied u/s 271D and 271E - cash loans taken by the assessee in contravention of 261SS - Tribunal was correct in holding that the orders imposing penalty under Section 271D and E were passed within the period of limitation prescribed under Section 275(1)(c) and whether the Tribunal was correct in confirming the findings? - Held that:- The only case of the assessee is that if the period of limitation prescribed in Section 271(1)(c) is reckoned from the date of the assessment order dated .....

  • 2015 (8) TMI 1213 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT

    Commissioner of Income Tax, Dhanbad Versus T.N. Malhotra, M/s Jai Steel Industries, Mahuda More, Dhanbad

    Income Tax: Dis-allowance of insurance claim written off - Held that:- It appears that theft was committed on 10th of September, 1989. Insurance was claimed by the assessee which was rejected by the insurance company in the next year mainly for the reason that there was no theft of plant and machinery or the raw materials. This amount was written off in the year 1993-94. Thus, in the assessment year 1993-94 no theft was committed, but, it was in the year 1989 and, therefore, rightly A.O. as well as the Comm.....

  • 2015 (8) TMI 1212 - DELHI HIGH COURT

    PR CIT-2 Versus Control And Switchgear Contractors Ltd.

    Income Tax: Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) - compensation "in lieu of giving up their right" received - CIT(A) deleted penalty confirmed by ITAT - Held that:- The Court finds that in the present case the order of the CIT (A) explaining why Section 271(1)(c) is not attracted in the facts and circumstances of the case merits no interference. The issue that arose for determination in the quantum appeal does appear to have been debatable as is evident from the narration of facts. There was a reference made by.....

  • 2015 (8) TMI 1211 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

    M/s. Prithvi Prakashan Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai & Others

    Income Tax: Validity of assessment proceedings under Section 143 (3) read with Section 158BC - satisfaction had not been recorded during the course of assessment proceedings in respect of the person searched i.e. SAPL - rectification of mistake - Held that:- It was on recall application filed by the Revenue to recall the order dated 14th March, 2012 that the Tribunal realized that the proceedings in respect of the person searched i.e. SAPL has been completed on 28th February 2005 while the notice to the Pe.....

  • 2015 (8) TMI 1210 - DELHI HIGH COURT

    Commissioner of Income Tax (Central-II) Versus Swanpnil Properties (P) Ltd.

    Income Tax: Unaccounted cash payment - addition on the basis of seized documents - ITAT consequently held that there was no basis for sustaining the addition in respect of alleged cash transactions referred to in the document in the hands of the Assessee - Held that:- Revenue having taken a conscious decision to initiate proceedings against Inmon under Section 147/143 (3) of the Act, and having in those proceedings added the entire cash amount aforementioned in the hands of Inmon, must pursue those proceed.....

More Income Tax Cases

  • 2015 (8) TMI 1101 - ITAT HYDERABAD

    Shri Y. Lava Kumar Versus Asstt. Commissioner of Wealth-tax, Circle 11 (1) , Hyderabad

    Wealth tax: Valuation - Whether the CWT(A) is right in deleting the additions made to the taxable wealth in conformity with S.7, Schedule III, Part H of the Wealth-tax Act read with Rule 20 of the Wealth-tax Rules - Held that:- Assessee has relinquished his rights in the property in question for a consideration of ₹ 2.45 crores in the previous year relevant for assessment year 2008-09, and accordingly offered the capital gains arising from the said transaction for assessment under the income-tax Act, .....

  • 2015 (8) TMI 483 - ITAT PUNE

    ACWT, Circle-1, Jalgaon Versus Shri Jagannath Nathu Wani

    Wealth tax: Enhancement in value of net wealth - Denial of exemption claim - AO denied the exemption claimed on the ground that these are single immovable properties and do not quality as commercial establishment - CWT(A) allowed exemption claim - Held that:- in absence of any contrary material brought to our notice by the Ld. Departmental Representative against the order of the Tribunal [2015 (8) TMI 186 - ITAT PUNE], we find no infirmity in the order of the CWT(A) treating the 2 properties as commercial p.....

  • 2015 (8) TMI 432 - ITAT PUNE

    ACIT, Circle-14, Pune Versus Mudhol Land Holding Pvt. Ltd.,

    Wealth tax: Determination of net wealth of assessee - Renting of property - Business Income or asset - Held that:- CWT(A) while treating the asset as a commercial property has followed the decision of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case [2015 (6) TMI 252 - ITAT PUNE] in the 263 proceedings and has also relied on various other decisions and since the Ld. Departmental Representative was unable to distinguish the findings given by the CWT(A) by placing any cogent material, therefore, we do not find any infirmi.....

  • 2015 (8) TMI 285 - SUPREME COURT

    P.A. Jose Etc. Versus Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Kottayam Etc Respondent (s)

    Wealth tax: Validity of High Court's order - HC has decided the appeal without framing the question of law - Held that:- appeal under the Section 27A (3) of The Wealth Tax Act, 1957 can be admitted only when a substantial question of law is involved in the appeal and according to sub-Section (4), the question of law has to be formulated by the High Court. - matter is remitted to the High Court so that a substantial question of law can be framed, if any, and the appeal can be heard again. - Impugned order is.....

  • 2015 (8) TMI 235 - ITAT CHENNAI

    M/s. Vyline Glass Works Ltd Versus The Asst. Commissioner of Wealth-tax

    Wealth tax: Validity of notice issued u/s 17 - Notice issued on he basis of audit objection - Addition in net wealth - Business Income - Assessing Officer observed that in this case the assessee was not carrying on any business in the impugned premises - Property given on lease rent - Held that:- There is nothing on the record to suggest that the Assessing Officer had issued the notice u/s 17 of the Act based on the audit objection. How the assessee came to the conclusion that the notice issued by the Asses.....

More Wealth tax Cases

  • 2015 (8) TMI 1249 - CESTAT MUMBAI

    Goel Nitron Constructions, Goel Ganga Promoters, Goeal Ganga Associates Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune- III

    Service Tax: Demand of service tax - maintenance and repair services - Held that:- Appellants are not liable to pay service tax under the category of "maintenance and repair services" and "one time maintenance charges" collected from buyers of the flat, relying on the earlier ruling of this Tribunal in the case of Kumar Beheray Rathi (2013 (12) TMI 269 - CESTAT MUMBAI) - Decided in favour of assessee......

  • 2015 (8) TMI 1248 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

    M/s. Phoenix International Ltd. Versus C.C.E. -& S.T. -Noida

    Service Tax: Renting of Immovable Property Service - Valuation - Inclusion of notional interest - Penalty u/s 77 - Held that:- Appellants have received a huge sum of Rs, 20 crores, interest free as security deposit at the time of execution of the agreement. The monthly rental fixed is so nominal in regard to the property that is leased. Again, the renewal terms of the agreement are that the agreement can be renewed up to 20 years. If renewed to such extended period, the refund of the security deposit need to.....

  • 2015 (8) TMI 1247 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD

    CCE, Kanpur Versus M/s Cross Road Auto Pvt. Ltd.

    Service Tax: Authorised service station service - Free services during warranty period - Whether respondent is liable to pay service tax on free own services provided by the dealers - Hed that:- it has not been brought out by Revenue whether any consideration is received by the dealers from the manufacturer or the buyers of vehicles - Decision in the case of CCE, Indore vs. Jabalpur Motors Ltd. reported in [2015 (1) TMI 1140 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] followed - Decided against Revenue......

  • 2015 (8) TMI 1246 - CESTAT DELHI

    C.S.T. -Service Tax-Delhi Versus Ishida India Pvt. Ltd.

    Service Tax: Denial of refund claim - Export of service - Goods used in India - Erection, Commission & Installation and Business Auxillery Services - Held that:- On analyzation of the activity of the respondents it can be seen that the respondents procure orders from Indian customers for their holding Company in Japan. The products are then supplied to Indian customers as per these purchase orders - The respondents receive commission for procurement of purchase orders. Therefore the services of the responden.....

  • 2015 (8) TMI 1245 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

    Commissioner of Central Excise, Panchkula Versus Duli Chand Narender Kumar Exports Pvt Ltd, Best Food International, Tanna Agro Impex Pvt Ltd, Modern Dairies Ltd, Muskan Overseas

    Service Tax: Power of Commissioner (Appeals) to remand the matter - Held that:- under section 85(4) the language is used in wider context. It does not restrict the type of order which the Commissioner (Appeals) may pass. Rather it states that the Commissioner (Appeals) may pass such order as he thinks fit. Thus scope of remand is included in the provision of law liad down in the section 85(4). Reliance is placed on the case of CST, Delhi vs. World Vision-[2009 (11) TMI 452 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI ] Reliance is a.....

More Service Tax Cases

  • 2015 (8) TMI 1237 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

    M/s Onida Saka Ltd., Shri Ashok Chawla, Shri Lokesh Khanna, M/s Adonis (India) Ltd Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Indore

    Central Excise: Duty demand - Valuation of goods - Related person - held that:- During this period, the entire production of Colour T.V. Sets of the appellant company was being cleared to M/s. AIL which is a group company of Onida Group. Initially, there were two allegations against the appellant company. First allegation was that the appellant company - M/s. Ondia Saka Limited and M/s. AIL are related persons within the meaning of this term as defined under section 4 (4) (c) of Central Excise Act, 1994 and acc.....

  • 2015 (8) TMI 1236 - CESTAT MUMBAI

    Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur

    Central Excise: Denial of CENVAT Credit - Exemption under Notification No.23/2004-CE dated 9.7.2004 - Held that:- Appellant has not reversed the credit on inputs on proportional basis as envisaged in the amended Rule 6(3) and in our view, the discussion on the said Rule is irrelevant in the facts of the present case. In the present case, the appellant has switched over to Rule 6(2) w.e.f. 1.9.2004 and reversed actual credit on its stores, work in progress and finished products as on 31.8.2004 and thus submissi.....

  • 2015 (8) TMI 1235 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

    Shri M.B. Baheti of M/s. Decora Tubes Ltd, Shri Rajesh Maheshwari Versus CCE & ST, Kanpur

    Central Excise: Recovery of wrongly taken cenvat credit - Imposition of penalty under Rule 26 - Held that:- Show cause notice had been issued not only to the appellant company M/s. DTL, Unit-II (Aluminium Division) but also to the Managing Director, Shri M.B. Baheti, Shri Ravindernath Jain, Joint Managing Director and Shri Rajesh Maheshwari, Manager (Finance). Even if the Commissioner could not adjudicate the question of duty demand against M/s.DTL in view of the liquidation order of the High Court on 11.07.200.....

  • 2015 (8) TMI 1234 - CESTAT CHENNAI

    Aluminium Powder Co Ltd And Others Versus C.C.,C.C.E. & S.T., Madurai And Others

    Central Excise: Denial of CENVAT Credit - Various services - Held that:- Credit on annual operation and maintenance service of windmill, normal maintenance and services availed in respect of functioning of wind mill are allowed. Appeals have been filed by Revenue against cenvat credit of service tax paid on lease rental allowed by the authority below. Record reveals that rent paid is directly attributable to the generation of wind energy. - issue of Cenvat credit of service tax paid on rental services is als.....

  • 2015 (8) TMI 1233 - CESTAT CHENNAI

    CCE, Tiruchirappalli, CCE, Chennai – III Versus M/s. Virgo Polymers India Ltd., M/s. Bishan Saroop Ram Kishan Agro Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Bharat Industrial Enterprises Ltd., M/s. Sakthi Knitting Ltd., M/s. Amirchand Jagadish Kumar Exports Ltd., M/s. Karur KCP Packagings Pvt. Ltd.

    Central Excise: Classification of Flexible Intermediate Bulk Containers (FIBC) - Classification under Heading 392090 / 39232990 or 6305 32 00 - Held that:- The Board has issued the clarification for the purpose of All Industry Rates of Duty Drawback and categorically clarified that classification of the product FIBC under drawback tariff item 6305. It is pertinent to state that both the drawback schedule and ITC Code issued by DGFT and CETH are aligned with HSN, the classification issued by the Board assumes vi.....

More Central Excise Cases

  • 2015 (8) TMI 1227 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

    The Senior Intelligence Officer, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence Versus K.P. Karunamoorthy, Director, M/s P.V. Spinning Mill India (P) Ltd.

    Customs: Obtaining Export obligation discharge certificate fraudulently – Cancellation of anticipatory bail – Because of fraudulent methods adopted by respondent to obtain Export Obligation Discharge Certificate, there is loss to Government of India and in order to safeguarding sum of public money criminal proceedings were initiated against which anticipatory bail was granted to respondent – Petitioner seeking cancellation of anticipatory bail granted – Held that:- submissions made by Assistant Solicitor.....

  • 2015 (8) TMI 1226 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

    Ramesh Kumar Versus State of Haryana

    Customs: Punishment for contravention in relation to cannabis plant and cannabis – Appeal against Conviction – After hearing parties, trial Court vide impugned judgment, convicted appellant for commission of offence punishable under Sections 20 of NDPS Act and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine – Appellant assailed said order of conviction on grounds of non-compliance of NDPS Act – Held that:- As PW-5 and PW-7, being material witness of recovery, are not alleged to have any an.....

  • 2015 (8) TMI 1225 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

    CUMMINS INDIA LTD. Versus UNION OF INDIA

    Customs: Filling of supplementary claim – Duty Drawback – Petitioners filed supplementary claim by applications under Rule 15 claiming amount – Said claim was rejected as time barred and also on ground that Order-in-Original passed by Commissioner did not cover drawback claims pertaining to shipping bill covered in supplementary claim – Revision was filed against said order of commissioner – Revisional Authority upheld order of commissioner holding that supplementary claims were barred by limitation – He.....

  • 2015 (8) TMI 1224 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

    COMMR. OF CUS., EXPORT Versus NATIONAL LEATHER CLOTH MFG. CO.

    Customs: Imposition of redemption fine when goods not available – Tribunal vide impugned order partly allowed appeal of respondent by dropping redemption fine as goods were not seized and were not available – Whether tribunal was legally justified in dropping redemption fine – Held that:- Availability of goods is one of criteria which has been evolved in reported decision of current Court in case of Commissioner of Customs (Import), Mumbai v. Finesse Creation Inc. [2009 (8) TMI 115 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICA.....

  • 2015 (8) TMI 1223 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT

    BRG IRON STEEL CO. PVT. LTD. Versus UNION OF INDIA

    Customs: Illegal Seizure of Goods – Clearance of goods upon payment of duty – Petitioner seeking appropriate direction, commanding respondent to complete final assessment of Customs duty and to grant provisional release of imported goods on basis of bills of entry – Petitioner contended that there is no reason for non-clearance of imported goods and action of authorities in not permitting petitioner to have imported goods cleared upon payment of duty is illegal, improper and abuse of power – Held that:- .....

More Customs Cases

  • 2015 (8) TMI 1241 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

    M/s Ran India Steels Pvt Ltd Versus The Assistant Commissioner (CT) (ENT) Namakkal, The Commercial Tax Officer (FAC Tiruchengode (Town) Circle Tiruchengode

    VAT and Sales Tax: Power to Assessment – Impugned order is challenged on ground that 1st respondent has no power of assessment, since same has been conferred on jurisdictional assessing authority -2nd respondent – Held that:- Admittedly 1st respondent, issued impugned notice and 2nd respondent conducted inspection at their factory premises and after spending whole day in assessing actual burning loss and actual consumption of electricity, after inspection, arrived at finding and based on finding 2nd respondent has.....

  • 2015 (8) TMI 1240 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT

    M/s. Rameshwar Prasad Ram Prasad Trading Company Versus The Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer

    VAT and Sales Tax: Penalty u/s 78(5) - Evasion of duty - Mens rea - violation of sub-section (2) of Section 78 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 - Held that:- It has been noticed by the Tax Board that there were several discrepancies noticed in the documents produced by the vehicle In-charge at the time of interception. It has been observed by the Tax Board that the documents namely; bill was prepared later on after the vehicle was intercepted and clear cut case has been made out by the Tax Board which is a fin.....

  • 2015 (8) TMI 1239 - ORISSA HIGH COURT

    State Bank of India and another Versus State of Odisha and others

    VAT and Sales Tax: Bank liability to pay VAT – Whether petitioner-bank was covered by definition of “dealer” under section 2(12) of Orissa Value Added Tax Act, 2004 and was liable to value added tax on sale of pledged assets effected by it for recovery of loan – Held that:- As observed by Supreme court in Federal Bank Limited [2007 (3) TMI 364 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] when bank sells pledged goods in exercise of its statutory power, such sales were required to be indicated in its balance sheet and profit and loss.....

  • 2015 (8) TMI 1238 - KERALA HIGH COURT

    Siemens Limited Versus Assistant Commissioner (Audit Assmt.) II, Commercial Taxes, Ernakulam and others

    VAT and Sales Tax: Rule 11B(2)(c) – Constitutional Validity – Invalid and Ultra Vires – Petitioner seeking declaration that rule 11B(2)(c) of Central Sales Tax (Kerala) Rules,1957 as invalid and ultra vires being in consistent with Central Sales Tax (Registration and Turnover) Rules framed by Central Government and beyond power conferred on State Government – Held that:- rule-making authority cannot legislate law which has effect of amending provisions of statute – State's power to make rules under Central Act, ex.....

  • 2015 (8) TMI 1185 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

    M/s Rajiv Metals Versus Addl. Commissioner Trade Tax, And Another, State of U.P. And Others

    VAT and Sales Tax: Re-assessment of turnover escaping assessment – Production as per SIB standards – Books of accounts of petitioner were duly audited and assessment order was passed –Thereafter, AO seek permission of Additional Commissioner under Section 21(2) of U.P. Trade Tax Act to make reassessment on reason of report received from SIB authorities after assessment order, which was permitted and subsequent notices were issued to petitioner – Held that:- As per section 21 reassessment proceedings can be initiat.....

More VAT and Sales Tax Cases

  • 2015 (8) TMI 993 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI

    PACL Ltd. and Others Versus Securities and Exchange Board of India,

    Corporate Laws: Registration for operating CIS scheme – Winding up of scheme and refund on non-compliance – Whether SEBI was justified in holding that schemes floated by Applicant constitute Collective Investment Schemes under SEBI Act, 1992 and that Applicant and its promoters and directors, were liable to wind up said schemes – Held that:- By inserting Section 12(1B) to SEBI Act legislature has made it mandatory for any person to obtain certificate of registration for operating CIS – Thus, operating CIS witho.....

  • 2015 (8) TMI 933 - SUPREME COURT

    Vedica Procon Private Limited Versus Balleshwar Greens Private Limited & Others

    Corporate Laws: Revocation of order accepting highest bid – auction of property of company under liquidation - High Court vide impugned order recorded that Company Judge’s order accepting bid of appellant was vitiated as Judge failed to take note of potential value of land and bid of appellant was inadequate price to property in question – Held that:- It was well settled principle as opined in case of Navalkha & Sons Versus Sri Ramanya Das & Ors. [1969 (10) TMI 41 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] that company court h.....

  • 2015 (8) TMI 932 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

    KPL International Limited Versus API Industries Private Limited

    Corporate Laws: Territorial jurisdiction to entertain suit – location of registered office of the company or location of carrying business or location of directors or location of regional office - Cause of action arising at principle place – Whether Trial Judge was right in taking view that respondent having only regional office in Mumbai, part of cause of action must also arise in Mumbai – Held that:- Supreme court in case of Jindal Vijaynagar Steel [2006 (8) TMI 594 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] rejected argument.....

  • 2015 (8) TMI 890 - SUPREME COURT

    M/s. Tech Invest India (Pvt.) Ltd. Thr. Major Shareholder Rajiv Gosain Versus M/s. Assam Power & Electricals Ltd. And Others

    Corporate Laws: Sale of Assets – Repayment of loan – Validity of Auction proceeding - High Court dismissed appeal and review application of appellant company, filed against order confirming sale and handing over assets of appellant-company to respondent in lieu of repayment of loan amount – Held that:- Prima facie, it appeared that objections of appellant were not properly considered as objections were not heard on merit and auction sale was confirmed – Conduct of Official Liquidator in selling property at pric.....

  • 2015 (8) TMI 889 - SUPREME COURT

    Tamil Nadu News Print & Papers Ltd. Versus D. Karunakar & Others

    Corporate Laws: Dishonor of Cheque - Liability of Director - Cheque in name of Accused company-1 was issued to Appellant which was not honoured and in spite of statutory notice issued, no amount in respect of said cheque was paid – Respondents filed petitions for quashing said complaint, which was allowed – Held that:- admitted position that simply because someone was Director in company, he cannot be held responsible in respect of cheque issued on behalf of company, but if concerned Director was in-charge of a.....

More Corporate Laws Cases

  • 2015 (8) TMI 1112 - PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT AT NEW DELHI

    LALIT KUMAR AGRAWAL (M.D.) Versus DY. DIR., DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT, GOA

    FEMA: Money laundering - res judicata in the criminal complaint - Attachment of property - appellant admitted that property is not owned by her but by the company - Held that:- The action of attachment is not in relation to a person as such but essentially to freeze the proceeds of the crime. The fact that the respondents could have acted only if there was reason to believe that a person is in possession of proceeds of crime does not mean that the authorities at this stage are obliged to prove the fa.....

  • 2015 (8) TMI 1105 - DELHI HIGH COURT

    KAVITA DOGRA Versus DIRECTOR OF ENFORCEMENT

    FEMA: Contravention of Section 18 (2) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 - non-realization of export proceeds - Held that:- Although Section 68 FERA is in the nature of a deeming provision, the proviso thereto contemplates rebuttal of such presumption by a person who is able to show that the contravention took place without his or her knowledge. - memorandum is a cyclostyled form and the averments as regards all the directors is identical. There is no specific mention of the precise role of .....

  • 2015 (8) TMI 236 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

    ND INVESTMENTS Versus UNION OF INDIA

    FEMA: Waiver of pre deposit - contravention of Section 3(b) and 6(2) of FEMA read with Regulation 5 of Foreign Exchange Management (Permissible Capital Account Transactions) Regulations, 2000 read with para 8 of Schedule I to Regulation 5(1) of Foreign Exchange Management (Transfer of Issue of Security by a person resident outside India) Regulations, 2000 - Imposition of penalty - Amount remitted for franchisee in IPL, reached BCCI through concerns abroad rather than the Indian subsidiary without maki.....

  • 2015 (8) TMI 187 - SUPREME COURT

    Vijay Mallya Versus Enforcement Directorate, Min. of Finance

    FEMA: Violation of provisions of Sections 47(1) & (2), 9(1)(c) and 8(1) - Permission from RBI for advertisement of ‘Kingfisher’ brand name on racing cars during Formula-I World Championships - Failure to appear against the summon issued - Held that:- Complaint is maintainable if there is default in not carrying out summons lawfully issued. The averments in the complaint show that the summons dated 21st December, 1999 were refused by the appellant and earlier summons were not carried out deliberately. .....

  • 2015 (7) TMI 701 - DELHI HIGH COURT

    VIPIN GUPTA & PREMWATI Versus DIRECTOR OF ENFORCEMENT, ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE

    FEMA: Imposition of penalty - Failure to furnish evidentiary proof of imports regarding foreign exchange in respect of nine remittances in contravention of Sections 8 (3) and 8 (4) of Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 - Held that:- Documents were in respect of imports that took place pursuant to the remittances made in the years 1994 to 1999. The Customs authorities had in 1995 seized some of the files in respect of imports that had taken place in 1994. The SCN was issued only in May 2002. The .....

More FEMA Cases

  • 2015 (8) TMI 1221 - SUPREME COURT

    Prabhu Dayal khandelwal Versus Chairman, U.P.S.C. & Ors.

    Allied Laws: Denial of promotion from the post of Commissioner of Income Tax to that of Chief Commissioner of Income Tax - Held that:- non-consideration of the claim of the appellant is concerned, we are satisfied that the proposition of law relevant for the controversy in hand, was declared upon by this Court in Abhijit Ghosh Dastidar v. Union of India and others, [2008 (10) TMI 599 - SUPREME COURT] - impugned order passed by the High Court, deserves to be set aside, inasmuch as, the claim of the appellant .....

  • 2015 (8) TMI 1220 - SUPREME COURT

    Suhas H. Pophale Versus Oriental Insurance Company Limited and its Estate Officer

    Allied Laws: Whether the rights of an occupant/licensee/ tenant protected under a State Rent Control Act (Bombay Rent Act, 1947 and its successor the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999, in the instant case), could be adversely affected by application of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 - Held that:- In the case of a company under the Companies Act, 1956 as in the present case, it is necessary that the premises must belong to or must be taken on lease by a company which has n.....

  • 2015 (8) TMI 1165 - SUPREME COURT

    Baleshwar Dayal Jaiswal Versus Bank of India & Others

    Allied Laws: Power of Tribunal to condone delay - Applicability of proviso to Section 20(3) of the RDB Act to the disposal of an appeal by the Appellate Tribunal under Section 18(2) of the SARFAESI Act - Whether the Appellate Tribunal under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 has the power to condone delay in filing an appeal under Section 18(1) of the said Act. - Held that:- The change intended in SARFAESI Act has to be seen from the statu.....

  • 2015 (8) TMI 1139 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

    K.S. Panduranga Versus State of Karnataka

    Allied Laws: Whether High Court could not have heard the appeal in the absence of the counsel for the accused - Appointment of amicus curiae - Hearing of appeal in absence of appellant - Conviction under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Imposition of fine -Held that:- In the judgement of Larger bench in Bani Singh (1996 (7) TMI 562 - SUPREME COURT), it has not been laid down as a ratio that in each circumstance, the High Court should appoint a counsel f.....

  • 2015 (8) TMI 1111 - SUPREME COURT

    Pratima Chowdhury Versus Kalpana Mukherjee & Anr

    Allied Laws: Ownership of flat - Flat transferred in the name of Respondent with the consent of Appellant - Arbitrator gave decision in favour of Appellant - Co-operative Tribunal and High Court decided against her - Held that:- The reason for transferring flat no. 5D indicated in the letters dated 11.11.1992 and 13.11.1992 was on account of the close relationship between Pratima Chowdhury and Kalpana Mukherjee - As a matter of fact, there was no close relationship between Pratima Chowdhury and Kalpana Mukhe.....

More Allied Laws Cases

 
 

Jiva Seva is Shiva Seva :
Service to humanity is Service to God

May I be born again and again, and suffer thousands of miseries so that I may worship the only God that exists, the only God I believe in, the sum total of all souls—and above all, my God the wicked, my God the miserable, my God the poor of all races, of all species, is the special object of my worship.

- Swami Vivekananda, CW, 5:137
 
 
 
what is new what is new





|| About us || Contact us || Feed Back || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Website