Search Results for "composition dealers"

30 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 30 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court of India: Judgment on Regulation and Approval of Genetically Modified Crops. Ensuring adherence to environmental safety, legal standards, and public health in the approval process for GM crops in India.

The Supreme Court of India concerning various writ petitions filed in public interest related to the regulation and approval of Genetically Modified (...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Karnataka High Court Allows Input Tax Credit Based on Annual Audited Accounts in KVAT Act Cases. The court held that Section 10(3) of the KVAT Act permits availment of input tax credit based on the annual audited statement in Form VAT 240, irrespective of the claim in returns under Section 35.

The judgment involves multiple writ petitions filed by M/s MFAR Constructions Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Mangalore Force, challenging the interpretation of Sec...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition by Mutual Fund Against Sales Tax Reassessment Orders — Holds Mutual Fund Not a Dealer Under MVAT Act, 2002. Reassessment Proceedings Initiated Beyond Limitation Period and Without Proper Sanction Are Invalid.

The petitioner, Axis Mutual Fund, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging several orders passed by the sales ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Allows Writ Petition Challenging Rejection of Composition Tax Application Under KVAT Act. Rule 135(4) of KVAT Rules, 2005 restricting composition scheme for dealers selling liquor held ultra vires Section 15 of KVAT Act, 2003.

The petitioner, M/s. Wonderla Holidays Limited, operates a composite business including an amusement park, a 3-star hotel, and a restaurant. It applie...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Revision Petitions in KVAT Act Case — Joint Commissioner Had Jurisdiction to Invoke Suo Moto Revision Under Section 63-A. Purchases from Composition Dealers Not Deductible from Contract Receipts for Taxable Turnover.

The case involves revision petitions filed by M/S JMC Projects (India) Ltd. against the State of Karnataka under Section 65(1) of the Karnataka Value ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Grants Injunction in Trademark Infringement and Passing Off Suit Over Pharmaceutical Marks OROFER and OROFER-XT vs COROFER and COROFER-XT. Court finds deceptive similarity and rejects acquiescence defense under Section 33 of Trade Marks Act, 1999.

The Plaintiff, Emcure Pharmaceuticals Ltd., filed a suit for trademark infringement and passing off against Corona Remedies Pvt. Ltd., alleging that t...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Circulars Including Dealer's PDI and Free After-Sales Service Costs in Assessable Value of Vehicles — Circulars Held Ultra Vires Section 4 of Central Excise Act, 1944.

The petitioner, M/s. Tata Motors Ltd., a manufacturer of vehicles, challenged clause 7 of Circular No. 643/34/2002CX dated 1st July, 2002 and Circular...