Multiple SCNs by different authorities on same issue and for same period create chaos and harassment
The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in HM Leisure vs Assistant Commissioner of CGST of CGST, Div. – 1 & 2 […]
Bombay high court
When Joint Ownership Turns Risky: Spouse Faces Tax Notice Over Partner’s ₹6.75 Crore Property Purchase
A recent Bombay High Court ruling has provided significant relief in a joint property ownership tax dispute. The case involved
Order against deceased person held void; Revenue can proceed afresh against legal heirs under GST Law
The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Sunil Thampy Nair v. State of Maharashtra [Writ Petition No. 18019 of 2024 dated
Rs 44 Cr Customs Duty evasion involving undervalued walnut imports: Bombay HC allows Anticipatory Bail
In a recent case, the Bombay High Court allowed anticipatory Bail in case of Rs 44 Cr of Customs Duty evasion involving undervalued walnut
HC quashes tax recovery against grocer, a victim of Aadhaar fraud
The Bombay High Court quashed an attachment order issued by the Gujarat commissioner of state tax against a small provision
Bombay HC Allows Capital Gains Tax Exemption For Multiple Homes Under Pre-2015 Law
In a significant relief to individual taxpayers, the Bombay High Court has ruled that long-term capital gains tax exemption under
Bombay HC directs deletion of GST registration obtained using impersonated Aadhaar and PAN
The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Vilas Prabhakar Lad v. UIDAI & Ors. [WRIT PETITION NO. 3586 OF 2021 dated
No embargo on transferring GST ITC between amalgamating companies located in distinct States
The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Umicore Autocat India Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors.
Bombay HC requests GST Council, GSTN to enable cross-State ITC transfers in mergers
Bombay High Court has urged the GST Council and the GST Network (GSTN) to provide for a regular mechanism for
Bombay High Court: GST Orders Cannot Be Mere Copy Paste of Show Cause Notices
The Bombay High Court has recently set aside a GST adjudication order and held that an order cannot be a