DSK Legal’s Post

'Corporate Laws' Series of Blog on “PAYMENT OF BONUS ACT, 1965” By Jayprakash Bansilal Somani, Advocate Supreme Court of India & IP Continue from last Tuesday....... Payment of Bonus Act, 1965, Sec 26 is related to Maintenance of registers, records, etc. Sec 27 is related Inspectors to Sec 28 is related to Penalty. Sec 29 is related to Offences by Companies. Sec 31 is related to Protection of action taken under the Act. Sec 31A is related to Special provision with respect to payment of bonus linked with production or productivity. Sec 32 is related to Act not to apply to certain classes of employees. Sec 33 is repealed. Sec 34 is related to Effect of laws and agreements inconsistent with the Act. Sec 35 is related to Saving. Sec 36 is related to Power of exemption. Sec 37 is repealed. Sec 38 is related to Power to make Rules. Sec 39 is related to Application of certain law not barred. Sec 40 is repeal and Saving. Payment of Bonus Act, 1965. This Act Contains total 40 Sections 4 Schedules. Now we will see the content of the Schedules. 1st & 2nd Schedule of this Act talks about Computation Of Gross Profits which is describe in Sec 4 (a) & 4 (b) of this Act. This Act was Amended in 2007. Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 has only one Rule as Below:-  1. Payment Of Bonus Rules, 1975.                                     ..…..Continue on next Tuesday. Note:- List is completed now. From next blog we will provide brief information of concern laws.. Assisted By:- Adv Shruti Kriti & Pooja Rai www.jayprakashsomani.com Call: PA 9322188701. #corporatelaw #jsas #supremecourtofindia

23……….. 9/07/2024 'Corporate Laws' Series of Blog on “PAYMENT OF BONUS ACT, 1965” By Jayprakash Bansilal Somani, Advocate Supreme Court of India & IP Continue from last Tuesday.......  Payment of Bonus Act, 1965, Sec 26 is related to Maintenance of registers, records, etc. Sec 27 is related Inspectors to Sec 28 is related to Penalty. Sec 29 is related to Offences by Companies. Sec 31 is related to Protection of action taken under the Act. Sec 31A is related to Special provision with respect to payment of bonus linked with production or productivity. Sec 32 is related to Act not to apply to certain classes of employees. Sec 33 is repealed. Sec 34 is related to Effect of laws and agreements inconsistent with the Act. Sec 35 is related to Saving. Sec 36 is related to Power of exemption. Sec 37 is repealed. Sec 38 is related to Power to make Rules. Sec 39 is related to Application of certain law not barred. Sec 40 is repeal and Saving. Payment of Bonus Act, 1965. This Act Contains total 40 Sections 4 Schedules. Now we will see the content of the Schedules. 1st & 2nd Schedule of this Act talks about Computation Of Gross Profits which is describe in Sec 4 (a) & 4 (b) of this Act. This Act was Amended in 2007. Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 has only one Rule as Below:-  1. Payment Of Bonus Rules, 1975.                                     ..…..Continue on next Tuesday. Note:- List is completed now. From next blog we will provide brief information of concern laws.. Assisted By:- Adv Shruti Kriti & Pooja Rai www.jayprakashsomani.com Call: PA 9322188701. #corporatelaw #jsas

Cancellation of Registration has serious impact on Business Entity: Allahabad HC directs to issue fresh SCN under CGST Act #registration #businessentity #allahabadhc #scn #cgstact #taxscan #taxnews Read More: https://lnkd.in/gNcjeAs5

Corporate Laws' Series of Blogs on every Tuesday   By  Jayprakash Bansilal Somani, Advocate Supreme Court of India & IP  www.jayprakashsomani.com Call: PA 9322188701         Continue from last Tuesday....  8. National Company Limited (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1980 9 . Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 10 . Securities Contract Regulation Act, 1956 11. Indian Bill of Lading Act, 1856 12 . Factories Act, 1948 13. Industries Development and Regulation Act, 1951 14. Inter-state Corporations Act, 1957 15. Cost and Works Accountants Act, 1959 16. Company Secretaries Act, 1980 17. Foreign Trade Development and Regulation Act, 1992 18. Special Economic Zones Act, 2005 19. Micro Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 20. Warehousing Development and Regulation Act, 2007 Continue... on next Tuesday    Note:- After the list of Corporate Laws we will provide brief information of all concern laws.. #advocates #ip #ca #ibc #supremecourt #nclat

We share the recent final order passed by the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court. The petitioner is a dealer registered in Maharashtra. It sold goods to a purchaser in Telangana. It sold goods from Delhi depot. The goods were intercepted, during transit, in Uttar Pradesh. An order came to be passed imposing penalty under section 129 of the CGST Act on the ground that the dispatch address of the goods is not mentioned in the invoice. An appeal was filed, but with no success. As there is no GST Tribunal, hence, writ petition was filed. The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court allowed the writ petition and set aside the orders. It held: (i) the goods mentioned in the invoice and e-way bill matched; in terms of quantity and value; the non-mention of dispatch address is a minor breach not inviting provisions of section 129; (ii) _mens rea_ is a sine qua non for imposition of penalty under section 129; (iii) follows judgment in the case in Hindustan Herbal Cosmetics; (iv) directs department to refund tax and penalties in 2 weeks to the petitioner. The matter was argued by our Partner Bharat Raichandani Bharat Raichandani Mahesh Raichandani Deepak Kumar Khokhar Annweshaa Laskar Prathamesh Gargate Jasmine Dixit Love Sharma Raaghul Piraanesh J R Shweta Samat Aman Mishra Sunil Yadav Bhavesh Vasu Rashi Chopra Prachi Sharma Chaitanya Gaurang Tripathi Rithik Jain Shraddha Sharma Bhagrati Sahu Ankita Raikar Isha Sharma Dhawal Parmar #news #share #justice #ubrlegal #lawfirm #lawfirms #legal #advocate #advocates #lawyer #updates #tax #gst #gstlitigation #gstadvisory #court #tribunal #judgement #views

GST is such an important yet less-understood topic and this webinar is an attempt by Heyo Phone & LawSikho to simplify it for you! 😃 Definitely attend it if you are - a business owner with GST - a business owner without GST (yet!) - someone whose work revolves around GST, taxation and compliance - someone who likes to learn cool stuff! I'll definitely try to attend it, and if I can't, I'll watch the recording. You too can get the recording if you just register for it, so go ahead and at least do that. Here's the link: lu.ma/gstwebinar Alright now, chop chop! #Webinar #webinaralert #gstcompliance #gstindia #gstupdates #gstfiling #smallbusiness

Many a times technicals/ legal principles becomes more important than merits. That's why I always say that merits of the case (tax dispute) is at one side and how a case is to be handled for optimum result for client is another side. Recently, in one of the cases, on the issue of Sec. 16(4) disallowance by the GST department found some basic violation of principles of law and accordingly advised to client for filing of writ petition before hon'ble Guwahati High Court instead of appeal before appellate authority due to obvious reasons. Accordingly represented the client before hon’ble Guwahati High Court, taking multiple shortcoming on the part of department, mainly being:  - Scrutiny u/s 61 has already been concluded with satisfaction of the department. Any further action to re-examine the issues which is covered, or ought to be covered are barred due to doctrine of Res Judicata. - Documents uploaded on GSTN portal were unsigned, and no valid order was served to the taxpayer within statutory time frame, hence whole proceedings are time barred. Uploading of documents on GSTN portal is merely a mechanism of communication, it cannot substitute requirement of signature on the relevant documents. Unsigned order, is non set in eyes of law and no action can be taken on the basis of the same. - DRC-01 (along with its annexures) cannot substitute Complete Show Cause Notice. Hon’ble high court heard the case at length and pleased to stay the order through which demand of INR 10.29 Cr. was created for violation of Sec. 16(4) of GST. WP(C) 2728/2024, Dt. 03.06.2024. Copy of order attached. #GST #Legal #Law #HighCourt

1/ 🎓⚖️ Dive into a landmark judgment from the Jharkhand High Court that's changing the game in GST compliance. #LegalUpdate #GST #India 2/ 📜 Case in Focus: A compliance query under the CGST Act turned into a legal milestone. The petitioners' responses to GST summons opened a debate on legal procedures. #TaxCompliance #JudicialInsight 3/ 💡 Did you know? Under the CGST Act, fines are capped at Rs. 25,000. But what happens when there's more to the story? #GSTFacts #LawTrivia 4/ 🤔 The court noted: Compliance met, but was there an abuse of legal process? A deep dive into Section 174 IPC vs. CGST Act compliance. #LegalAnalysis #Judiciary 5/ 💥 Big Reveal: The court quashed all proceedings against the petitioners, setting a precedent on how GST compliance is interpreted legally. #BreakingNews #CourtDecisions 6/ 🧐 What does this mean for businesses and legal practitioners? A new perspective on handling GST summons and legal implications. #BusinessLaw #GSTImpact 7/ 👩⚖️👨⚖️ Stay tuned as we dissect this ruling and its impact on future GST cases. Don't forget to share your thoughts! #Discussion #LegalCommunity 8/ 📌 Bookmark this thread for updates on similar cases and expert insights into GST laws. Knowledge is power, especially in the legal world! #StayInformed #LegalKnowledge. Title: Satyendra Singh Kushwah vs The State of Jharkhand Court: Jharkhand High Court Citation: Cr. M.P. 2459 of 2019 Dated: 05-Oct-2023

🌟 Important GST Case Update 🌟 📜 Case: Cluster Enterprises vs. Deputy Assistant Commissioner (ST)-2 📅 Date: July 24, 2024 🗂 Court: Andhra Pradesh High Court *Key Points from the Judgment:* *Show Cause Notice Lacked Details:* The show cause notice issued under Section 130 for confiscation of goods and vehicle lacked detailed reasons and necessary material. This violated the principles of natural justice. *Violation of Natural Justice:* The confiscation order contained details not included in the show cause notices, depriving the assessee of a fair opportunity to respond. *Mandatory Document Identification Number (DIN):* The confiscation order lacked a DIN, which is a mandatory requirement as per CBIC Circular No. 128/47/2019-GST. Non-mention of DIN invalidates the proceedings. *Action Under Section 130:* The court held that action under Section 130 can only be initiated after action under Section 129. Direct invocation of Section 130 without prior invocation of Section 129 is impermissible. *Court's Decision:* The confiscation order was set aside, and the matter was remanded for proper re-adjudication. *Warms Regards* CA Kamal Kumar Valecha Immediate Past Chairman Jabalpur Branch 9300127830 The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) GSTspeaking Study circle

Landmark Judgement : GST Demand order was set aside where personal hearing was not granted to the assessee: Allahabad HC Allahabad HC nullifies GST demand order in Mahaveer Trading Co. v. Deputy Commissioner State Tax. Failure to grant personal hearing deemed unfair; order overturned. Except for date of filing reply as 30-10-2023, abbreviation NA was mentioned against column to mention date of personal hearing, time of personal hearing and venue of personal hearing. HC observed that impugned order was passed in gross violation of fundamental principles of natural justice and was to be set aside. This Highlights importance of fairness in GST proceedings. #GSTLaw #LegalUpdate #AllahabadHighCourt #gstupdate