Co-operative society's mandatory reserve and share capital fixed deposits with banks-interest treated as business income under 80P(2)(a)(iii) deductio...
Income tax reassessment reopening after four years on investigation tip, without s.147 proviso disclosure failure, struck down as borrowed satisfactio...
Writ jurisdiction was invoked to challenge detention/seizure proceedings on the plea that the goods were released on lesser security under s.129(1)(a) of the U.P. GST Act, that invoices could not be doubted without any survey, and that the show cause notice having been issued in the driver's name could not prejudice the supplier. The Court held that reliance on alleged "consistency" with other writ orders is misplaced because writ relief is discretionary and fact-sensitive, and even minor factual differences justify different outcomes. As the petitioner had an efficacious statutory appeal and the contentions involved disputed factual issues (including service and non-response to the notice), writ interference was refused and the petition was dismissed - HC
Writ jurisdiction was invoked to challenge detention/seizure proceedings on the plea that the goods were released on lesser security under s.129(1)(a) of the U.P. GST Act, that invoices could not be doubted without any survey, and that the show cause notice having been issued in the driver's name could not prejudice the supplier. The Court held that reliance on alleged "consistency" with other writ orders is misplaced because writ relief is discretionary and fact-sensitive, and even minor factual differences justify different outcomes. As the petitioner had an efficacious statutory appeal and the contentions involved disputed factual issues (including service and non-response to the notice), writ interference was refused and the petition was dismissed - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
