Laureate Buildwell Private Limited Vs Charanjeet Singh (Supreme Court)
Whether a subsequent purchaser of an apartment from the original allottee in an under construction project stands on the same footing as the original purchaser and are entitled to the same relief. The court was guided of the precarious position in which the purchasers of the flat are put to in case the flat is not delivered and finally taking into account the object of the legislation Consumer Protection Act to address complaints of consumers (an expression defined and interpreted widely) and provide a forum for their quick redressal, and, furthermore, wherever third parties have claimed relief, technicalities have been brushed aside consistently, by this court
Prakash Gupta Vs SEBI (Supreme Court)
Whether consent of SEBI has to be read in Section 24A of SEBI Act 1992 dealing with compounding of offences, even though the section doesn’t provide for such consent. Supreme Court deals with the entire jurisprudence on the compounding of an offence.
KONE ELEVATORS (INDIA) P LTD VS ACIT (Madras High Court)
After 4years from the end of the assessment year, a scrutiny assessment allowing deduction u/s. 10B can’t be re-opened for the reason that the approval by the Industries Department has not been ratified by the board.
ACIT vs. Sur Buildcon Pvt. Ltd (ITAT Delhi)
The A.O.,by failing to confront the assessees with the evidence he had gathered u/s 142(2) Act, has, therefore, erroneously skipped the mandatory intermediary step prescribed u/s 142(3) of the Act. Thus, when the A.O. has directly gone on to pass the Assessment Orders u/s 147/143(3) of the Act to make the impugned additions u/s 68, the same is in direct violation of the procedure of enquiry prescribed in the Statute that inherently encompasses the Principle(s) of Natural Justice.
taxofindia 