Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 101 to 120 of 1499 Records
-
2023 (3) TMI 1399 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Seeking permission to pay the tax amount of Rs. 6,00,360/- in easy installments - HELD THAT:- The petitioner is directed to pay the tax amount in six installments. The first installment of Rs. 1,00,360/- shall be paid on or before 30 April 2023. The balance amount may be deposited by the petitioner in five equal installments of Rs. 1,00,000/- each payable on or before 31th May 2023, 30th June 2023, 31th July 2023, 31st August 2023 and 30th September 2023 respectively.
In so far as, the penalty of Rs. 5,37,516/- is concerned, it is open to the petitioner to file an appeal under Section 18 of U.P. Motor Vehicle Taxation Act, 1997 before the appropriate authority.
-
2023 (3) TMI 1398 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Smuggling - non–compliance of Section 52A of NDPS Act - HELD THAT:- Admittedly there was confusion in the procedure of drawing samples and as per ARVIND YADAV VERSUS GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI [2022 (3) TMI 1551 - SC ORDER] even if samples were drawn at the spot would not vitiate the trial, hence any violation thereof could never be the sole basis for grant of bail. Such discrepancy in rules was even noted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in UNION OF INDIA VERSUS MOHANLAL [2016 (5) TMI 500 - SUPREME COURT] and accordingly fresh Rules were notified vide gazette notification dated 23.12.2022, thus the compliance of Standing Order 01/1989 prior to the notification perse would not be a ground to grant bail.
Hence purely on this ground, bail not granted to the petitioner - petition dismissed.
-
2023 (3) TMI 1397 - SUPREME COURT
Stocking of medicines for "sale" - appellant is a senior doctor who is engaged as an Associate Professor and Head of Department, Dermatology in a Government Medical College, and being a medical practitioner - HELD THAT:- Considering the small quantity of medicines, most of which are in the category of lotions and ointments, it cannot be said by any stretch of imagination that such medicines could be 'stocked' for sale and would come in the category of stocking of medicines for the purpose of sale. When small quantity of medicine has been found in the premises of a registered medical practitioner, it would not amount to selling their medicines across the counter in an open shop. In fact, this is not even the allegation against the Appellant. Undoubtedly, the provisions of Section 18 and 27 are relevant provisions under the law, which have a social purpose, which is to protect ordinary citizens from being exploited inter alia, by unethical medical practitioners, and for this reason the punishment Under Section 27 can extend up to 5 years under the law, and has a minimum punishment of 3 years.
Given the facts and circumstances of the case and considering that the Appellant is a registered medical practitioner, along with the fact that the quantity of medicines which have been seized is extremely small, a quantity which can be easily found in the house or a consultation room of a doctor, no offence is made out in the present case. In fact, an exception has been created under Schedule 'K' read with Rule 123 to the rules, the Appellant ought to have been given the benefit of these provisions and such a registered medical practitioner should not have been allowed to face a trial where in all likelihood the prosecution would have failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt.
The possession of the drugs is not disputed in this case by either side. However, this Court in the case of MOHD. SHABIR VERSUS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [1979 (1) TMI 234 - SUPREME COURT] while allowing an appeal in part and directing the release of an Appellant who had been prosecuted under the provision 18(c) of the 1940 Act, this Court observed that possession simpliciter would not itself be an offence but the prosecution had to prove the essential ingredient Under Section 27 which was that even a 'stock' of the medicine was for sale.
The sanctioning authority had not examined at all whether a practising doctor could be prosecuted under the facts of the case, considering the small quantity of the drugs and the exception created in favour of medical practitioner Under Rule 123, read with the Schedule "K". All these factors ought to have been considered by the sanctioning authority.
Appeal allowed.
-
2023 (3) TMI 1396 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Punishment of reduction of pay by 3 stages in the time scale - HELD THAT:- This Court in exercise of writ jurisdiction under Article 226 would not sit in appeal over the decision taken by the respondents; however, would be more concerned with the decision making process. In the present case, the principles of natural justice have been adhered to.No grievance has been made in respect of the same. The defence has been appreciated and re-appreciated by the Appellate Authority and the Tribunal - there are no perversity in the appreciation of the defence in that regard.
The Appellate Authority came to the conclusion that the charges I and IV are not proved and they are required to be dropped. However, from operative part of the order, it appears that the Appellate Authoritydropped charges in Article I while modifying the order of the Disciplinary Authority and imposing the penalty. In fact, the Appellate Authority was required to consider dropping of charges in Articles I and IV both.
The matter is remitted back to the Appellate Authority for deciding the appeal afresh with regard to the quantum of punishment - Appellate Authority shall consider that the charges framed in Articles I and IV have been dropped against the petitioner as not proved and only charges in Articles II and III are to be considered for punishment and thereafter impose punishment accordingly - Petition disposed off.
-
2023 (3) TMI 1395 - ITAT DELHI
Addition u/s 68 - undisclosed income which has been introduced in the garb of share capital/share premium - CIT(A) deleted addition - HELD THAT:- As going through the entire contents of the paper book and after perusing the facts on record, we do not find any strength in the ratio given by the ld. CIT(A), hence, owing to the absence of the pertinent facts, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer to inquire into the issue afresh and pass a speaking order after affording due opportunity to the assessee. Appeal of the assessee is Revenue for statistical purpose.
-
2023 (3) TMI 1394 - CESTAT MUMBAI
Interest liability for ‘undue retention’ of deposits forced, by unfortunate circumstances and extraneous forces - applicant submitted that the precedent decisions on the extent to which interest liability for undue retention has been found equitable are on record - HELD THAT:- It is only appropriate that a copy of this order may be placed before Revenue Secretary, Government of India and Chairman, Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs (CBIC) with the request to consider issuing of instructions on accountability under Conduct Rules applicable to Central Civil Services, as well as legal requirement under the empowering statue, obliging tax authorities to respond to judicial determination.
-
2023 (3) TMI 1393 - CESTAT KOLKATA
Demand of differential duty - Erection, Installation & Commissioning Services - benefit of Notification No.1/2006-ST dated 01.03.2006 denied - Revenue is of the view that the appellant is not entitled for the benefit of the said Notification as it is purely a service contract - HELD THAT:- There is not dispute, the services in question have been supplied by the appellants along with the materials, for which, the appropriate classification is “Works Contract Service”, which came into service tax net from 01.06.2007.
As per the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Larsen & Toubro Limited [2015 (8) TMI 749 - SUPREME COURT], this issue has been clarified and after going through the said judgement, we hold that for the period prior to 01.06.2007, the demand under the category of “Erection, Installation & Commissioning Services”, was not sustainable as the appropriate classification is “Works Contract Service”. Admittedly, no demand has been made for the period prior to 01.06.2007 under the “Works Contract Service”. Therefore, the demand of service tax from the appellants does not survive prior to 01.06.2007.
For the period post 01.06.2007, it is held that the appellant is entitled for the benefit of Notification No.01/2006-ST dated 01.03.2006. The said Notification narrates that if the assessee supplied the services along with materials and the value of service cannot be quantified, in that that circumstances, the assessee is entitled for 67% abatement of the total service provided by the assesse. The same is the proportion under “Works Contract Service”, wherein the assesse is liable to pay service tax on 33% of the gross value of service provided. In that circumstances also, the appellant has paid service tax of 33% of the gross value of service provided in question. In that circumstances, the demands against the appellants are not sustainable.
Thus, all the demands are barred by limitation as the issue of taxability was in dispute during the impugned period and the show-cause notices were issued by invoking extended period of limitation.
There are no merit in the impugned orders and the same are set aside - appeal allowed.
-
2023 (3) TMI 1392 - ITAT HYDERABAD
TP Adjustment - comparable selection - HELD THAT:- We respectfully, following the decision of the Coordinate Bench in assessee’s own case for the A.Y 2013-14 [2022 (12) TMI 1431 - ITAT HYDERABAD] to exclude M/s. Infosys BPO and M/s. Eclerx Services Ltd from the list of comparables. The TPO is directed to pass the order giving effect in accordance with the law.
Inclusion of ACE BPO Services Pvt. Ltd, and Jindal Intellicom (P) Ltd - Respectfully following our decision in the case of assessee for the assessment year 2013-14 [2022 (12) TMI 1431 - ITAT HYDERABAD] we also remand back the inclusion of these two comparables to the file of TPO to pass appropriate order after considering the directions issued by us and also after affording the opportunity to the assessee.
M/s. MPS Ltd - CIT(A) have directed the TPO to exclude this comparable, but the order passed by the ld.CIT(A) is lacking in reasoning and basis for arriving at the above said finding. In our view, the objection raised by the Revenue, needs to be allowed and the exclusion of M/s. MPS Ltd. is required to be sent back to the file of the ld.CIT(A) with a direction to pass afresh order considering the rival contentions of the parties.
M/s. Datamatics Financial Services Ltd - Contention of the ld.DR that the order passed by the ld.CIT(A) was a cryptic and non-speaking order, and therefore, the issue of inclusion of Datamatics is required to be reconsidered by the ld.CIT(A) after giving the opportunity to the Assessing Officer / TPO acceptable.
Interest on outstanding trade receivables - whether assessee has not furnished any inter company agreement to prove the credit period is 90 days and the Ld.CIT(A) erred in adjudicating credit period without remanding to the file of TPO? - HELD THAT:- As no documentary evidence has been brought on record before us so that we can infer that 120 days credit period is a reasonable period. In our view, the approach of ld.CIT(A) cannot be faulted with. Hence, we direct the TPO / Assessing Officer to charge interest at LIBOR + 200 points. Further, we direct the Assessing Officer / TPO to allow the credit period and charge interest over and above the outstanding period of 60 days - we direct the TPO / Assessing Officer to decide the issue afresh after considering our directions reproduced hereinabove at para 9.1. for the current assessment year as well.
-
2023 (3) TMI 1391 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Benami transaction - As argued petitioner submits that, without providing any opportunity to the petitioner, the first respondent has passed the impugned order, which is in violation of the principles of natural justice - respondent submits that, initially, notice was sent to the petitioner and the petitioner appeared before the Initiating Authority and petitioner has given four addresses, from which, all are incorrect address. Due to which, the notices sent to the petitioner were returned with an acknowledgment “no such person”. Hence, the present impugned order was passed in the absence of the petitioner - HELD THAT:- This Court is of the view that, expressing any opinion on the merits of the case would adversely affect the interest of the petitioner as well as the respondents. This Court has to see whether any opportunity was given to the petitioner before passing the impugned order. A perusal of the impugned order reveals that, the petitioner had not appeared before the adjudicating authority. In his absence, the present impugned order is passed, which is in violation of principles of natural justice.
In view of the above, the impugned order passed by the first respondent u/s 26(3) of the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988, is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the first respondent for fresh consideration.
-
2023 (3) TMI 1390 - PATNA HIGH COURT
Maintainability of petition - availability of alternative remedy under Sub-Section (8) and Sub-Section (9) of Section 112 of the B.G.S.T. Act - - non-constitution of the Tribunal - petitioner prevented from availing the benefit of stay of recovery of balance amount of tax in terms of Section 112 (8) and (9) of the B.G.S.T Act upon deposit of the amounts as contemplated under Sub-section (8) of Section 112.
HELD THAT:- The respondent State authorities have acknowledged the fact of non-constitution of the Tribunal and come out with a notification bearing Order No. 09/2019-State Tax, S. O. 399, dated 11.12.2019 for removal of difficulties, in exercise of powers under Section 172 of the B.G.S.T Act which provides that period of limitation for the purpose of preferring an appeal before the Tribunal under Section 112 shall start only after the date on which the President, or the State President, as the case may be, of the Tribunal after its constitution under Section 109 of the B.G.S.T Act, enters office.
Considering the facts and circumstances noted above, this Court in the case of ANGEL ENGICON PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS STATE OF BIHAR, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX [2023 (3) TMI 879 - PATNA HIGH COURT] held that The statutory relief of stay on deposit of the statutory amount, in the opinion of this Court, cannot be open ended. For balancing the equities, therefore, the Court is of the opinion that since order is being passed due to non-constitution of the Tribunal by the respondent-Authorities, the petitioner would be required to present/file his appeal under Section 112 of the B.G.S.T. Act, once the Tribunal is constituted and made functional and the President or the State President may enter office.
There is an additional fact in the instant case, as asserted by the petitioner, that in terms of the liberty granted under earlier order dated 16.11.2022, in these proceedings, he has already deposited 20 percent of the remaining amount of tax in dispute.
The petition is disposed off.
-
2023 (3) TMI 1389 - ITAT MUMBAI
Interest paid on late payment of service tax - allowable business expenditure u/s 37(1) or not? - whether interest paid on late payment of service tax is compensatory in nature and cannot be held it to be penal in nature? - HELD THAT:- It is noted that the assessee has claimed as expense the interest incurred which was due to belated payment of service tax which has been disallowed by the AO holding it to be penal in nature, whereas it is noted that the interest paid by the assessee on delayed payment of service tax is compensatory in nature and is allowable expenditure u/s 37(1).
It is noted that the Service Tax Act itself provide for payment of interest to the Government-Treasury if there is delay in payment of Service Tax. And since the Service Tax Act itself allowed belated payment of the Tax along with interest, the Explanation-1 to 37 of the Act is not attracted. And therefore, ground is allowed.
-
2023 (3) TMI 1388 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
Fraudulent/Preferential transaction - Validity of application filed by the Liquidator of the Corporate Debtor - direction not to disturb the possession or interfere with the leasehold right of M/s Indore Steel & Alloys Pvt. Ltd. (present Respondent No.1) and Tin shed on the leasehold land - whether the transfer of subject land by MPIDCL to Respondent No.1 has been executed in accordance with law? - whether there is any merit in the claim of the Appellant that the transaction was not done in good faith but was a fraudulent and a preferential transaction?
HELD THAT:- The Adjudicating Authority has returned the finding that in terms of the sale deed executed by MPFC in favour of the Corporate Debtor, the latter was required to get the lease executed in its favor within a period of six months from the date of execution of the sale deed failing which MPIDCL would have the right to cancel the lease and allot the subject land to other applicants. Cognizance has also been taken by the Adjudicating Authority of MP Rules, 2019 providing for automatic cancellation of the lease if the purchaser after purchase of the land fails to get the lease executed in its favor - The Adjudicating Authority has held that ISAPL has thus legally and validly acquired leasehold ownership rights and possession over the subject land directly from the MPIDCL and not from the corporate debtor. Holding that ISAPL is the perpetual lessee of the subject land, the impugned order also notes that this transaction between ISAPL and MPIDCL does not fall within the purview of Sections 43, 49, and 66 of the IBC.
It is noticed from the facts of the present case that the corporate debtor in spite of being aware that it was under obligation to get the lease deed of 23.02.2010 executed in its favour, failing which MPIDCL was free to further allot the subject land, never got the lease deed executed by MPIDCL despite lapse of 10 years. Hence, in terms of para 6 of the sale deed, the leasehold right of the corporate debtor over the subject land had clearly lapsed. We do not find any mala-fide or perversity on the part of Respondent No.6 in their understanding or appreciation of MP Rules and application of Clause 6 of the sale deed executed with the Corporate Debtor. In the given circumstances, MPIDCL being a wholly owned subsidiary of the State Government of Madhya Pradesh and bound by the MP Rules, 2019, there is no error in the findings of the Adjudicating Authority that MPIDCL was fully authorized, being the owner of the subject land, to execute the lease deed in favour of Respondent No.1.
It has also been contended by the Learned Counsel for the Appellant it is not MPIDCL which had cancelled the lease or re-auctioned on its own but it was occasioned by a joint application filed by PTL and ISAPL before MPIDCL. The role of suspended management in aiding, abetting and prompting the transfer of subject land and that PTL was used by them as an illegal conduit to commit fraud on the creditors of the Corporate Debtor has also been raised by the Appellant - the contention of the Respondents agreed that the transaction between ISAPL and PTL related to purchase of Tin shed while the transaction between ISAPL and MPIDCL was for lease rights over the subject land and that both transactions were separate and not connected.
It has also been contended by the Respondents that the fact that the corporate debtor did not acquire ownership rights over the said land is substantiated by the fact that the lease deed entered into between Respondent No.1/ISAPL and MPIDCL was an amendment of the original lease deed of PCPL dated 07.02.1987 for the remaining lease period. This clearly shows that MPIDCL had never executed any lease deed in favour of the corporate debtor or else it would have had to modify or amend the lease deed signed with them and not with PCPL while transferring the leasehold rights for the remaining period to Respondent No.1.
This brings us to the contention of the Appellant that the ex-management by not getting the name changed in the lease deed in favour of the Corporate Debtor in 2010 used this fact as a loophole to transfer the leasehold rights in favour of Respondent No.1 and that this amounts to conducting fraudulent transaction - The negligence on the part of the Corporate Debtor not to have executed the lease deed cannot be overlooked and cannot be allowed to become a ruse for fraudulent transaction. Mere possibility of a potential collusion without material on record is not sufficient to persuade this Bench to record any finding on preferential or fraudulent transaction. The present transaction between MPIDCL and the ISAPL/Respondent No. 1 not being illegal nor suffering from any procedural or material irregularities, we are satisfied with the findings of the Adjudicating Authority that it is not open to the Appellant to unsettle or derail the transaction by raising the bogey of Section 43, 49 and 66 of IBC or to disturb the possession or interfere with the leasehold right of ISAPL.
There are no illegality in the impugned order of the Adjudicating Authority which may warrant any interference in the exercise of our appellate jurisdiction. There is no merit in the appeal - appeal dismissed.
-
2023 (3) TMI 1387 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
TDS u/s 194N - cash withdrawals exceeding Rs.1 and from their accounts from District Cooperative Banks - WP been filed seeking direction to the Central Government to consider the representation sent by the Chief Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu to the Chairperson, Central Board of Direct Taxes and the Ministry of Finance, Government of India to accord exemption to the Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Societies in the State of Tamil Nadu from the provisions of Section 194-N and to consequently restrain the concerned authorities from taking any coercive steps for recovery of tax deduction at source of payments made by the District Central Co-operative Banks to the Primary Agricultural Co-operative Credit Societies in that regard.
HELD THAT:- This Court without expressing any view on the merits of the controversy involved, passes the following order:-
(i) it shall be incumbent upon the Ministry of Finance, Government of India and the Central Board of Direct Taxes, New Delhi to immediately examine the representation in D.O. Lr No. 15350/CC1/2022 dated 27.09.2022 sent by the Chief Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu;
(ii) if it is found that any other details or supporting documents are necessary for granting the relief claimed had not been produced, the deficiencies in that regard shall be informed in writing to the concerned persons requiring the same to be furnished within a time frame of not less than 15 clear working days for the same;
(iii) in the event of not being satisfied with the said requirements even thereafter, an enquiry shall be conducted affording full opportunity of hearing to the Government of Tamil Nadu and to all stakeholders through public notice to explain their views in that regard;
(iv) a reasoned order shall be passed dealing with each of the contentions raised on merits and in accordance with law and the decision taken communicated to the Government of Tamil Nadu in writing under acknowledgment; and
(v) the authorities under the Act shall be restrained from taking any coercive action for recovery of tax deduction at source u/s 194-N of the Act from the Primary Agricultural Co-operative Credit Societies in the State of Tamil Nadu till the aforesaid exercise is completed.
-
2023 (3) TMI 1386 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM
Disallowance of delayed payment of employees’ contribution of PF and ESI - HELD THAT:- As assessee made remittances before filing the return of income u/s 139(1), but not within the due date specified by the respective PF / ESI Acts. Therefore, have no hesitation to come to a conclusion that the disallowance made by the AO as well as the Ld.CIT(A) needs no interference in view of the decision of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd [2022 (10) TMI 617 - SUPREME COURT]
Deduction u/s 80P - assessee has not filed the return of income on or before the due date specified u/s 139(1) - HELD THAT:- As gone through the provisions of section 80AC(ii) amendment, which made it clear that any deduction that is claimed under para ‘c’ of Chapter VI A would be admissible, only if the return of income in that case is filed within the prescribed due date. Therefore, no claim under any of the provisions of para ‘c’ of Chapter VIA would be admissible in the case of belated return.
It present case return of income was filed beyond the due date of filing of return of income specified u/s 139(1) - it is a mechanical exercise and one that can be carried out by CPC very much within the scope of section 143(1)(a)(ii) of the Act. Therefore, the contention of the assessee that the amendment made to section 143(1)(a)(v) is applicable w.e.f. 01.04.2021 has no application in the present case - Decided against assessee.
-
2023 (3) TMI 1385 - SC ORDER
Grant of Conditional Bail - payment of substantial sum ordered as a pre-condition for grant of bail - seeking that bail prayer has to be considered on the basis of the merit of the petition - HELD THAT:- The bail order given to the petitioner stands confirmed.
Requirement of deposit of amount shall not be precondition for release on bail. However, other conditions are left undisturbed and shall be complied by the petitioner.
Application disposed off.
-
2023 (3) TMI 1384 - CESTAT CHENNAI
Levy of service tax - Banking and other Financial Service - amount which was deducted by the Foreign bank towards the bank charges for the year 2006-2007 to 2010-2011 - reverse charge mechanism - invocation of extended period - imposition of penalties - HELD THAT:- The appellants have submitted the documents for realization of export sale proceeds to their bank namely SBI, which in turn has used the services of the foreign bank for collection of export sale proceeds. Obviously, the foreign banks who have rendered their services, have deducted their charges while remitting the export sale proceeds to SBI. The appellant has never dealt with the foreign bank on his own and the Banking and Other Financial Service if at all was rendered only to SBI. Amount charged by the foreign bank while remitting export sale proceeds, whether can be subjected to service tax or not has been decided by the CESTAT Principal Bench, New Delhi in the case of M/S. THEME EXPORTS PVT. LTD. VERSUS C.S.T., DELHI [2018 (5) TMI 825 - CESTAT NEW DELHI], by relying on the ratio laid down by the Tribunal in the case of M/S DILEEP INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. VERSUS CCE, JAIPUR [2017 (10) TMI 1231 - CESTAT NEW DELHI], where the Tribunal held while exporting their goods, they lodged their bills for collection to the Indian Bankers who in turn send the same to the foreign banks. The foreign banks while remitting the money to the Indian Bank, deduct their charges for collection of bills which in turn are charged by the Indian Banks from the appellants. When it is so, then the appellant are not entitled to pay the service tax.
Extended period of limitation - penalties - HELD THAT:- As the issue is resolved on merits, there is no need to discuss about invocability of extended period in this case and also regarding legality of imposition of penalties.
Appeal allowed.
-
2023 (3) TMI 1383 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Seeking permission of recording his statement under Section 108 of Customs Act, 1962 in visible but not audible distance of advocate - HELD THAT:- The Petitioner alleges that he has been assaulted by some of the officers of the Customs Department in the past. This allegation of course has been denied by Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. But, what remains on record, is clear and it is the apprehension entertained by the Petitioner. It is this apprehension, which is required to be taken care of by us in a best possible manner. The best possible manner to deal with it is to allow presence of the advocate at a visible distance but beyond the audible distance. This will also ensure transparency in the enquiry that Custom Officers propose to make with the Petitioner and this is what has been done by this Court in several similar cases in the past.
It is directed that if any statement of the Petitioner is to be recorded in terms of Section 108 of Customs Act, 1962, same shall be recorded in the presence of advocate of the Petitioner kept at a visible distance but not audible distance during interrogation. The prayer for videography is however rejected - Appeal allowed in part.
-
2023 (3) TMI 1382 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Termination of proceedings - earlier proceedings under Section 67 of the U.P. Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 terminated upon the appeal of the petitioner being allowed.
HELD THAT:- Matter requires consideration.
Learned counsel for the respondents prays for and is granted six weeks time to file counter. Petitioner will have two weeks thereafter to file rejoinder - List thereafter.
-
2023 (3) TMI 1381 - SUPREME COURT
Seeking rejection of the Resolution Plan and the liquidation of SHPL - it is alleged that the plan could not have dealt with land belonging to the municipal corporation without its prior approval under Sections 92 and 92-A of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act (MMC Act) 1988 - termination of contract agreement and no lease was ever executed in respect of the land belonging to MCGM in favour of SHPL.
Whether the High Court of Andhra Pradesh was justified in entertaining the PIL and issuing an interim order?
HELD THAT:- The appellant would have been relegated to pursue the objection to the maintainability of the PIL before the High Court. However, it is evident that this course of action need not be followed for the simple reason that the PIL was a complete abuse of process.
The IBC provides forums and remedies. In the exercise of the jurisdiction conferred by Section 60(5), MCGM has moved the NCLT contending that the land in question which is situated at Mumbai cannot be included as a part of the assets of the Corporate Debtor. Since the application is pending before the NCLT, no opinion to be expressed on it. The provisions of the IBC were invoked for initiating the CIRP in respect of the Corporate Debtor. The first respondent who had evidently no locus in the proceedings chose to move a PIL ostensibly on the ground that he was seeking to safeguard the facility of the hospital for the benefit of the residents of Mumbai.
The High Court should have rejected the PIL at the very threshold. It is apparent that the PIL was only intended to thwart the process which has been initiated under the IBC. The PIL was evidently motivated by extraneous considerations and should have been dismissed.
Since the limited ambit of these proceedings relates to the recourse which was taken to the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution by the first respondent, no opinion expressed on the merits of the rights and contentions of the parties in the proceedings which are pending before the NCLT - recourse to the jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution in the form of a PIL constituted an abuse of process.
Petition dismissed.
-
2023 (3) TMI 1380 - ITAT SURAT
Condonation of delay - delay of about 80 days in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal - Whether assessee failed to show reasonable cause for condoning the delay? - HELD THAT:- As assessee has shown sufficient cause for condonation of delay. Appeal fees was deposited on 08/12/2022, father of assessee died on 09/12/2022. This fact is not in dispute as the ld. representative is one of the leading counsel in Surat Bench. It is matter of record this appeal was filed only on 02/02/2023.
There is no intentional or deliberate delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. It is settled law that when technical consideration and cause of substantial justice are pitted against each other, the cause of substantial justice may be preferred. Thus, keeping in view such principle, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. Now adverting to the merit of the case.
CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of assessee without discussing the grounds of appeal in an ex parte proceeding - As recorded while considering the condonation of delay, assessee submitted that he was not informed by his earlier representative and the assessee is not well-versed with the faceless hearing. The notice if any was not served to the assessee directly rather may have been sent on e-mail on his earlier representative who has not informed the assessee
The assessee remained unrepresented before the ld. CIT(A), therefore, restore the appeal to the file of ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue on merit. The assessee is also directed to be more vigilant and to make compliance in time and without any further delay.
............
|