Expert Knowledge,
Straight from Practitioners.
Tax tips, legal guides, and financial advice written by the same verified CAs, Advocates, and Advisors you can consult on ConsultEase.
Kerala HC in the case of IREL (India) Limited Versus P. N. Raghava Panicker
Case Covered: IREL (India) Limited Versus P. N. Raghava Panicker Facts of the Case: By this writ petition, the petitioner, IREL (India) Limited/employer is challenging Ext.P6 order passed by the Controlling Authority on 13.06.2018, under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as
Orissa HC in the case of Chairman-Cum-Managing… Versus Controlling Authority
Case Covered: Chairman-Cum-Managing… Versus Controlling Authority Facts of the Case: The Orissa Mining Corporation Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Corporation’) calls into question the legality of the direction given by the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (in short ‘Act’) directing
E-invoicing in India! Concept and Challenges!
E-invoicing in India! Concept and Challenges! E-invoicing – Status update! Already implemented – 1.10.2020 → • Aggregate turnover above INR 500 crore! Likely from – 1.01.2021 → • Aggregate turnover between INR 100 crore to 500 crores! Likely from – 1.04.2021 → • Aggregate turnover below INR 100 crore!
JDA Under GST
1. Joint Development Agreement 1A. Taxability On Transfer of Development Rights Development rights are Immovable Property Law relating to immovable property Finance Act, as well as the GST Act, does not provide for the definition of immovable property. Transfer of Property Act covers the law
Madras HC in the case of M/s. Maansarovar Motors Private Limited
Case Covered: M/s. Maansarovar Motors Private Limited Versus The Assistant Commissioner Facts of the Case: This batch of writ petitions revolves around the interpretation of Section 50 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (in short ‘Act’), particularly the effective date of application of
Input Tax Credit under Section 16 (2) – The Etymology of Double/Triple Jeopardy (???)
Input Tax Credit under Section 16 (2) – The Etymology of Double/Triple Jeopardy (???) Informally, it is called the “Double Whammy” or the “Triple Whammy” – I write this article to put forth an instance of Double/Triple Jeopardy in connection with Input Tax Credit under
CESTAT in the case of Interglobe Aviation Limited Versus Commissioner of Customs
Case Covered: Interglobe Aviation Limited Versus Commissioner of Customs Facts of the Case: The Appeals seek the quashing of the 346 orders passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) that uphold the orders of assessment of Bills of Entry, as a result of which all
QR – 70 ITR & Audit Further Extension
QR – 70 ITR & Audit Further Extension 30th December 2020 & 31st December 2020 and 31st January 2021 {As per CBDT Press Release dated 24.10.2020} {The necessary notification in this regard shall be issued in due course – says press release} Regarding further extension
Telangana HC in the case of M/s. Magma Fincorp Limited
Case Covered: M/s. Magma Fincorp Limited Versus State of Telangana Facts of the Case: Challenging the rejection of transitional relief in terms of sections 73 and 74 of the Telangana Goods and Services Act, 2017 (for short ‘the Act’) read with Rule 121 thereto, and
Kerala HC in the case of Madhav Motors Versus State Tax officer
Case Covered: Madhav Motors Versus State Tax officer Facts of the Case: The petitioner is a dealer in automobiles and was registered as such under the erstwhile Kerala Value Added Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘the KVAT Act). With the introduction of the GST
Issuance of notice u/s 131 (1A) of the Income Tax Act 1961
Issuance of notice u/s 131 (1A) of the Income Tax Act 1961 after the conclusion of Income Tax Search and Seizure u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act 1961 – Legal Paradox Introduction: Ever since the enactment of the original Income-tax statute of 1922, the
Bombay HC in the case of KLT Automotive and Tubular Products Limited
Case Covered: KLT Automotive and Tubular Products Limited Versus Union of India Facts of the Case: Though the writ petition was hotly contested by the respondents by filing a number of affidavits and was also heard at length, because of subsequent development it may not