Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
DCDRC also held that in order to keep a check on unruly service providers such as Uber, who commit breach of commitments at the nick of time, they are required to be dealt with heavy hands and as such they must be made to deposit at least Rs.10,000 as compensation in Consumer Welfare Fund of the Chandigarh District Forum.
The High Court has also observed that the Service Tax Department cannot invoke the extended period on the sole ground of omission as the same can be invoked only when that there is a deliberate intention to evade payment of tax.
National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC): While deciding upon the instant complaint concerning alleged unfair trade practice followed by Flipkart of tampering
Supreme Court settled the issue of whether “body corporate” is excluded from the definition of “consulting engineer” under Section 65(31) of the Finance Act, 1994 prior to the amendment in 2005.
Delhi High Court: Sanjeev Narula, J., refused to interfere in the interim arbitral award whereby the sole arbitrator had allowed certain claims of
Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): Ramesh Nair (Judicial Member) allowed an appeal which was filed against the denial order
Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): S.S. Garg (Judicial Member) allowed appeals directed against the common impugned order passed by