Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Precedent Upheld: Extended Limitation & Tax Issues Clarified in Landmark Decision</h1> <h3>M/s Dhingra Jardine Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Versus The State of Haryana and others</h3> M/s Dhingra Jardine Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Versus The State of Haryana and others - [2017] 101 VST 34 (P&H) Issues Involved:1. Revisional power based on the Supreme Court judgment in K. Raheja Development Corporation.2. Applicability of extended period of limitation for revisional jurisdiction.3. Validity of show cause notice lacking basic facts for invoking exception clause.4. Invocation of exception clause for revisional jurisdiction beyond the normal period.5. Binding nature of departmental circulars.6. Vires of Explanation (i) to Section 2(1)(zg) of the Act.7. Levy of tax on builders in the absence of machinery provisions.8. Assessment framed in the name of a dissolved company.Detailed Analysis:Issue No. 1: Revisional Power Based on K. Raheja Development Corporation JudgmentThe court held that the judgment of the Supreme Court in K. Raheja Development Corporation was a binding precedent and declared the law on the subject at that time. This judgment remained binding until it was reconsidered by a larger bench in L&T's 2nd case, which upheld the law declared in K. Raheja Development Corporation's case. Therefore, authorities could take action based on this judgment.Issue No. 2: Applicability of Extended Period of Limitation for Revisional JurisdictionThe court ruled that the extended period for revisional jurisdiction applies only to cases where the period prescribed before the amendment had not expired. A dead claim cannot be revived by the amendment. The amendment cannot inject life into claims where the limitation period had already expired before the amendment.Issue No. 3: Validity of Show Cause Notice Lacking Basic Facts for Invoking Exception ClauseThe court did not delve into this issue in detail as the orders had already been passed and were under consideration. The significance of the show cause notice's contents was deemed less relevant at this stage.Issue No. 4: Invocation of Exception Clause for Revisional Jurisdiction Beyond the Normal PeriodThe court opined that the exception clause for invoking extended limitation should be used only in exceptional circumstances. Generally, the event justifying the exception should occur after the normal limitation period has expired. However, if the event occurs just before the expiry and action is taken within a reasonable time or the delay is satisfactorily explained, the exception can be invoked.Issue No. 5: Binding Nature of Departmental CircularsThe court held that departmental circulars are binding on the departmental authorities but not on the courts, especially if there is a contrary judicial pronouncement. Circulars contrary to statutory provisions have no legal existence.Issue No. 6: Vires of Explanation (i) to Section 2(1)(zg) of the ActThe court upheld the vires of Explanation (i) to Section 2(1)(zg) of the Act, referring to a previous judgment in CHD Developers Limited's case. The explanation was deemed a definition clause and not a charging section, thus not unconstitutional.Issue No. 7: Levy of Tax on Builders in the Absence of Machinery ProvisionsFor the period up to 16.5.2010, the court found that there were no machinery provisions for calculating taxable turnover in the Act or Rules, making the levy unenforceable. From 17.5.2010 onwards, with the amended Rules in place, the levy was sustained.Issue No. 8: Assessment Framed in the Name of a Dissolved CompanyThe court held that no assessment could be framed against a company that had been dissolved after merging with another company. The assessment order against M/s Sukh Realtors Pvt. Ltd., which had merged with M/s S. S. Group Pvt. Ltd., was set aside.Relief:The court disposed of the writ petitions by addressing each legal issue comprehensively, providing clarity on the application of the law in the context of the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found