Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The Gujarat Government had issued the impugned Notification dated 18.04.2023 during the pendency of the present writ petition and after receiving the notice issued by the Court. The Supreme Court observed that the State Government could have waited till the next date of hearing which was on 28.04.2023.
Supreme Court observed that if the interpretation that once an auditor resigns, the proceedings under Section 140(5) stand terminated and are no longer further required to be proceeded, an auditor may resign to avoid Tribunal’s final order and its consequence as provided under the second proviso to Section 140(5).
The Revenue had submitted that the Assessing Officer is competent to consider all the material that is available on record, including that found during the search, and make an assessment of ‘total income’. While some of the High Courts agreed with the said proposition, some disagreed. The Supreme Court was, hence, called upon to resolve the conundrum.
“Without the ration card a migrant/unorganized labourer or his family members may be deprived of the benefit of the schemes and may be the benefit under the National Food Security Act”, the Supreme Court observed.
Criticising the practice of the advocates going on strike and abstaining them from work, the Court observed that it is appropriate that their genuine grievances are considered by some forum so that such strikes can be avoided.
The Supreme Court observed that the entire acquisition proceedings and the benefits, which were proposed by the State Government to Anil Agarwal Foundation for setting up Vedanta University were vitiated by favourism and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
The amendment in Section 153-C of the Income Tax, 1961 was brought and the words “belongs or belong to” were substituted by the words “pertains or pertain to” after a ruling by Delhi High Court in Pepsico India Holdings Private Limited v. ACIT, 2014 SCC OnLine Del 4155.
The Supreme Court observed that the consequences on nonpayment or belated remittance of the TDS would be under Section 201(1A) and Section 276-B of Income Tax Act, 1961.
The Supreme Court observed that the undertrial prisoners/convicts were not released on merits but were released only to prevent the spread of COVID-19 virus among prisoners in over-crowded prisons.
The Supreme Court was unimpressed with the explanation given by the plaintiff for the delay of 853 days that he initially fell sick with Jaundice and was later confined to house with High Blood Pressure, Diabetes and other diseases. The petition had extension of time to deposit the balance sale consideration of Rs. 15,00,000/-.
The Supreme Court was hearing the case where a manufacturer was earlier manufacturing “Spun Line Crown Cork” used for sealing the glass bottles but now with the use of modern technologies, was manufacturing “Double Lip Dry Blend Crowns”, also used for sealing the glass bottles.
Supreme Court: In a case where an employee had produced a fake certificate for seeking employment, the bench of MR Shah* and
Appointment on compassionate ground is a concession and not a right.
Supreme Court: In a case where the members of the Lok Adalat, Madhya Pradesh High Court had entered into the merits of
“Any effort which weakens the system and shake the faith of the common man in the justice dispensation has to be discouraged.”