Indlexliga的封面图片
Indlexliga

Indlexliga

法律服务

A Community for Legal Professionals, Academics and Students for sharing useful Information, News, Views, Opportunities

关于我们

网站
www.indlexliga.com
所属行业
法律服务
规模
51-200 人
类型
非营利机构

动态

  • 查看Indlexliga的组织主页

    230 位关注者

    ?? Important Update on GST Waiver Applications (SPL 01/SPL 02)! ?? Taxpayers facing issues while filing waiver applications under the GST waiver scheme—this is for you! Many have raised concerns about: ? Order numbers not appearing in SPL 02 ? Payment details not auto-populating ? Difficulties in making payments for demand orders Additionally, there’s a common misconception about the last date to file waiver applications. March 31, 2025, is NOT the deadline for applications—the correct last date is June 30, 2025. However, the payment must be made by March 31, 2025 to avail of the scheme benefits. To clear all doubts and guide you through the correct process, I’ve written a detailed blog explaining: ?? Key issues taxpayers are facing ?? Correct deadlines for payment & application submission ?? Step-by-step solutions to file your waiver application smoothly Read the full blog here: https://lnkd.in/gvXGyHNe If you’re dealing with these challenges or know someone who is, share this post to help fellow taxpayers stay compliant and avoid last-minute hassles! #GST #TaxCompliance #WaiverScheme #GSTUpdates #Taxation #Finance

  • 查看Indlexliga的组织主页

    230 位关注者

    Supreme Court Person knowingly entered into agreement regarding litigated property is not entitled to Protection under S.53A of Transfer of Property Act. Excerpts The Court held that Section 53A TPA cannot be invoked by a transferee to obstruct or resist the claims of decree holders who have legally acquired rights over the suit property. It emphasized that a transferee who enters into a sale agreement during pending litigation, despite lacking a valid claim, cannot use this provision to override the decree holders' rights. “the Courts have uniformly held that the limited rights of the transferee pendent lite on the principle of lis pendens. Such limited rights cannot be stretched to obstruct and resist the full claim of the decree holders to execute the decree in their favour. In fact, the Courts have deprecated such obstruction.”, the court observed. Case Title: RAJU NAIDU VERSUS CHENMOUGA SUNDRA & ORS. Source : Livelaw

  • 查看Indlexliga的组织主页

    230 位关注者

    Kerala High Court With the intent to to slap one-time tax on vehicles pursuant to the second proviso to Section 3(1) of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, Transport department has no authority to change category of vehicles (registered under Goods Carriage Vehicles). Excerpts The Division Bench of?Justices?A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar?and?Easwaran S.?stated that?“the department cannot alter their stand and classify the vehicles separately for the purposes of levy of one- time tax to the Kerala Motor Vehicles Taxation Act.” Case Title: Managing Partner, Vee Tee Logistics v. Joint Regional Transport Officer Source: Livelaw

  • 查看Indlexliga的组织主页

    230 位关注者

    Supreme Court Only if instructed by an AOR or otherwise as permitted by the court, an advocate (not an AOR) can appear, plead and address the court Excerpts An Advocate whose name is entered on the roll of any State Bar Council maintained under the Advocates Act, 1961 is entitled to appear before the Supreme Court, his appearance would be subject to the said Rules of 2013 framed by the Supreme Court...As per Rule 1(b),?no Advocate other than the Advocate-on-Record for a party can appear, plead and address the Court in a matter unless he is instructed by the Advocate-on-Record or permitted by the Court. Rule 2(b) mandates that a Senior Advocate shall not appear without an Advocate-on-record in the Supreme Court and shall not appear without a junior in any other court in India. Thus, as per the said Rule so far as Supreme Court is concerned, a Senior Advocate can not appear without the Advocate on Record appearing on behalf of a party." Case Details: SUPREME COURT BAR ASSOCIATION AND ANR. v. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ORS., MA 3-4/2025 in Crl.A. No. 3883-3884/2024

  • 查看Indlexliga的组织主页

    230 位关注者

    Dishonor of cheque alone is not sufficient to attract offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, but failure to make the payment within 15 days following the receipt of notice of payment demand will create cause of action under said Section 138. Excerpts "It is manifest that to constitute an offence under Section 138 of the Act, the following ingredients are required to be fulfilled: (i) A person must have drawn a cheque on an account maintained by him in a bank for payment of a certain amount of money to another person from out of that account. (ii) The cheque should have been issued for the discharge, in whole or in part, of any debt or other liability. (iii) That cheque has been presented to the bank within a period of six months from the date on which it is drawn or within the period of its validity, whichever is earlier. (iv) That cheque is returned by the bank unpaid, either because of the amount of money standing to the credit of the account is insufficient to honour the cheque or that it exceeds the amount arranged to be paid from that account by an agreement made with the bank. (v) The payee or the holder in due course of the cheque makes a demand for the payment of the said amount of money by giving a notice in writing to the drawer of the cheque, within 15 days of the receipt of information by him from the bank regarding the return of the cheque as unpaid. (vi) The drawer of such cheque fails to make payment of the said amount of money to the payee or the holder in due course of the cheque within 15 days of the receipt of the said notice. Case Title: VISHNOO MITTAL VERSUS M/S SHAKTI TRADING COMPANY Source: Livelaw

  • 查看Indlexliga的组织主页

    230 位关注者

    Bombay high Court Pursuant to High Court Judges (Salaries and Conditions of Services) Act 1954?Judges who resigned will also be treated as retired judges and entitled to same compensatory benefits as retired judges Excerpts “From careful scrutiny of Section 14 and 15 of 1954 Act, it is evident that the entitlement of a judge to pension is on his retirement and the same includes an involuntary act as well inasmuch as retirement on account of ill-health is as contemplated by clause 14(c) of 1956 Act is an involuntary act. The resignation as well as the retirement, both result in the conclusion of the service career. In fact the resignation is one of the modes of retirement from service and is a voluntary act. In case the Legislature intended to confine the benefits of pension only to a Judge who has retired on superannuation, it would have expressly said so. The word 'retirement' in Sections 14 and 15 of 1954 Act has not been used in a restricted sense to mean retirement on superannuation only.” Case title: Pushpa W/O Virendra Ganediwala vs. High Court Of Judicature Of Bombay Through Registrar General (WP/15018/2023) Source : Livelaw

  • 查看Indlexliga的组织主页

    230 位关注者

    Delhi High Court In cases of cancellation of GST registration, it is mandatory for GST authorities to provide reasons and intent to cancel registration in the show cause notice to trader whose GST registration is under consideration for cancellation. Any failure on part of authorities to notify reasons and intent to GST registration cancellation in such show cause notice, then any order for GST registration cancellation with retrospective effect is invalid. Excerpts In the absence of reasons having been assigned in the original SCN in support of a proposed retrospective cancellation as well as a failure to place the petitioner on prior notice of such an intent clearly invalidates the impugned action. Case title: JSD Traders LLP v. Additional Commissioner, GST Source: Livelaw

相似主页