Though the concept of finality of judgment has to be preserved, at the same time, the principle of ex debito justitiae cannot be given a gobye. If the Court finds that the earlier judgment does not lay down a correct position of law, it is always permissible for the Court to reconsider the same and if necessary, to refer it to a larger Bench
| Posted on: October 1, 2022 |
The CBDT has issued a Notification dated 26 September 222 by which it has stipulated the Guidelines for compulsory selection of returns for Complete Scrutiny during the Financial Year 2022-23. The Notification sets out the detailed procedure for compulsory selection in such cases
| Posted on: September 28, 2022 |
The benefit of exemption under section 11 cannot be denied to the entire income of the charitable trust but should be restricted only to the extent of income diverted in breach of Section 13 of the Act
| Posted on: September 20, 2022 |
In conformity with the Government’s policy of facilitating Ease of Doing Business and decriminalisation of offences, CBDT has taken steps in this direction and issued revised Guidelines for Compounding of offences under the Income-tax Act, 1961(the ‘Act’) dated 16.09.2022 with reference to various offences covered under the prosecution provisions of the Act.
| Posted on: September 18, 2022 |
Legal representatives cannot say that they are not covered by the definition of “borrower” because Section 2(2) of the SARFAESI Act provides a reference that the definition and expressions under the Transfer of Property Act are expressly applicable, and a “borrower” being admittedly the mortgager, his liability under the SARFAESI Act cannot be said to have been wiped off on account of his death and his legal representatives are equally bound and stand covered by the definition of the “borrower” under the SARFAESI Act
| Posted on: September 11, 2022 |
It is not for the court to question the judiciousness of the decision taken by the Liquidator with the idea of enhancing the value of the assets of the Corporate Debtor being put up for sale. The right to refuse the highest bid or completely abandon or cancel the bidding process was available to the Liquidator unless it is shown that process was a malafide exercise
| Posted on: September 11, 2022 |
The IBC prevails over The Customs Act, to the extent that once moratorium is imposed in terms of Sections 14 or 33(5) of the IBC as the case may be, the respondent authority only has a limited jurisdiction to assess/ determine the quantum of customs duty and other levies. The respondent authority does not have the power to initiate recovery of dues by means of sale/ confiscation, as provided under the Customs Act.
| Posted on: September 11, 2022 |
A writ petition against the private financial institution – ARC – under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the proposed action/actions under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act can be said to be not maintainable. In the present case, the ARC proposed to take action/actions under the SARFAESI Act to recover the borrowed amount as a secured creditor. The ARC as such cannot be said to be performing public functions which are normally expected to be performed by the State authorities. During the course of a commercial transaction and under the contract, the bank/ARC lent the money to the borrowers herein and therefore the said activity of the bank/ARC cannot be said to be as performing a public function which is normally expected to be performed by the State authorities. If proceedings are initiated under the SARFAESI Act and/or any proposed action is to be taken and the borrower is aggrieved by any of the actions of the private bank/bank/ARC, borrower has to avail the remedy under the SARFAESI Act and no writ petition would lie and/or is maintainable and/or entertainable
| Posted on: September 10, 2022 |
It is well established that burden of proving that a particular sale is benami lies on the person who alleges the transaction to be a benami. The essence of a benami transaction is the intention of the party or parties concerned and often, such intention is shrouded in a thick veil which cannot be easily pierced through. But such difficulties do not relieve the person asserting the transaction to be benami of any part of the serious onus that rests on him, nor justify the acceptance of mere conjectures or surmises, as a substitute for proof
| Posted on: September 9, 2022 |
The Supreme Court will not interfere in the exercise of its powers under Article 136 of the Constitution of India with the concurrent findings recorded by the courts below. But where material aspects have not been taken into consideration and where the findings of the Court are unsupportable from the evidence on record resulting in miscarriage of justice, the Court will certainly interfere
| Posted on: September 9, 2022 |