Tag: apex court

Parties misuse reservation policy for political gain, AG tells Supreme Court | India News – Times of India

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


Expressing concern over political parties using reservation policy for vote-bank politics, attorney general KK Venugopal on Thursday told the apex court that it is unfortunate that such promise on the eve of elections is not treated as bribe.
Addressing a Constitution bench of Justices Ashok Bhushan, L Nageswara Rao, S Abdul Nazeer, Hemant Gupta and S Ravindra Bhat on reservation for socially and educationally backward classes including quota for Marathas in Maharashtra, Venugoupal said states are allowed to identify backward classes for purpose of reservation.
He, however, submitted that it had become a regular feature of electoral politics to whip up sentiments of a particular caste or class on the eve of election by political parties by promising to include it within the ‘reserved’ category. “This unfortunately is not considered a bribe. It is very unfortunate,” he said.

[ad_2]

READ FULL ARTICLE HERE

Leave a comment , , , , , , , , , ,

Foreign cos use GST gaps, cause loss: PIL – Times of India

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Wednesday sought responses of the finance ministry, the GST Council and the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) on a PIL seeking a mechanism to levy GST on foreign companies, like Facebook and Google, in business-to-business transactions for Online Information Database Access and Retrieval (OIDAR) services.
Petitioner Pradeep Goyal, through senior advocate Sonia Mathur, told the SC that the government had no mechanism to track total GST paid on OIDAR services used by Indian recipients, which do not qualify to be Non-Taxable Online Recipients (NTORs), under reverse charge basis.
“The nature of OIDAR services are such that they can be provided online from a remote location outside the table territory. The overseas suppliers of such services would have an unfair tax advantage should the services provided by them be left out of the tax net,” Mathur said.

A bench of Chief Justice S A Bobde and Justices A S Bopanna and V Ramasubramanian termed the PIL, which the petitioner claimed to be non-adversarial or for any personal gain, to be a good one, needing adjudication by the apex court. The PIL, filed through advocate Charu Mathur, said the government was losing millions of dollars as goods and services tax as it did not have any mechanism to plug the gaps exploited by foreign entities.
“Figures of revenue generated out of services provided to non-NTORs are not reported anywhere in GST returns. As most overseas service providers maintain their accounts in foreign jurisdictions and are audited as per local laws of the country in which they are located, the Indian government has no mechanism to verify the total receipts earned by these service providers from India and check GST compliances,” the petitioner said.

[ad_2]

READ FULL ARTICLE HERE

Leave a comment , , , ,

Foreign companies use GST gaps, cause loss: PIL – Times of India

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Wednesday sought responses of the finance ministry, the GST Council and the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) on a PIL seeking a mechanism to levy GST on foreign companies, like Facebook and Google, in business-to-business transactions for Online Information Database Access and Retrieval (OIDAR) services.
Petitioner Pradeep Goyal, through senior advocate Sonia Mathur, told the SC that the government had no mechanism to track total GST paid on OIDAR services used by Indian recipients, which do not qualify to be Non-Taxable Online Recipients (NTORs), under reverse charge basis.

“The nature of OIDAR services are such that they can be provided online from a remote location outside the table territory. The overseas suppliers of such services would have an unfair tax advantage should the services provided by them be left out of the tax net,” Mathur said.
A bench of Chief Justice S A Bobde and Justices A S Bopanna and V Ramasubramanian termed the PIL, which the petitioner claimed to be non-adversarial or for any personal gain, to be a good one, needing adjudication by the apex court. The PIL, filed through advocate Charu Mathur, said the government was losing millions of dollars as goods and services tax as it did not have any mechanism to plug the gaps exploited by foreign entities.
“Figures of revenue generated out of services provided to non-NTORs are not reported anywhere in GST returns. As most overseas service providers maintain their accounts in foreign jurisdictions and are audited as per local laws of the country in which they are located, the Indian government has no mechanism to verify the total receipts earned by these service providers from India and check GST compliances,” the petitioner said.

[ad_2]

READ FULL ARTICLE HERE

Leave a comment , , , , ,

Collegium split over selection of woman judge to Supreme Court | India News – Times of India

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court‘s five-member collegium headed by CJI S A Bobde failed to reach consensus over recommending Justice B V Nagarathna, a judge of Karnataka High Court, for appointment as judge of the SC as some said it would lead to supersession of many HC chief justices, who are far more senior than her.
CJI Bobde and another judge had placed Justice Nagarathna’s name for consideration before the collegium also comprising Justices N V Ramana, R F Nariman, U U Lalit and A M Khanwilkar with the hope that if she got through the process of scrutiny and the government appointed her, then she would go on to become the first woman CJI after retirement of Justice Surya Kant as CJI in February 2027.
But some members of the collegium argued that recommending Justice Nagarathna’s name, even in the women’s quota, would lead to supersession of several HC chief justices, including Justice Abhay S Oak (Karnataka) and two other senior judges from Karnataka — Justice L Narayana Swamy (present CJ of Himachal HC who belongs to the Scheduled Caste community) and Justice Ravi V Malimath (senior judge in Himachal Pradesh and belonging to OBC community).
A few members of the collegium said if Justice Nagarathna’s name was to be recommended for appointment as SC judge, then it should be along with that of Justice Oak.
But both the names appeared to be breaching the balance in regional representation among SC judges, as observed by the apex court in its fourth judges case judgment in 2015, while striking down the National Judicial Appointments Commission.
If Justice Nagarathna is appointed, there will be four judges from Karnataka in the SC. If Justice Oak’s name is recommended, there will be five judges from Maharashtra. If the collegium recommends Justice Nagarathna, then it could also be accused of ignoring Justice Hima Kohli, the senior-most among women HC judges in the country and the present CJ of Telangana HC. Justice Kohli’s parent HC is Delhi and her elevation would increase the number of judges from Delhi HC in the SC to four.
The collegium members appear to have been caught in a Catch-22 situation and the sharp division in views over Justices Nagarathna and Oak seems to have pushed the discussion over other names to the background. The SC has five vacancies at present against the sanctioned strength of 34.
With just a little over a month to go for CJI Bobde’s retirement on April 24, it is not clear whether there will be a collegium meeting again this week or next week to reach a consensus over some names so that the CJI does not retire without making any appointment to the SC. As per convention, the CJI writes to the government a month before his retirement for appointment of his successor and then refrains from holding any collegium meeting for selection of judges to the SC or HCs.

[ad_2]

READ FULL ARTICLE HERE

Leave a comment , , , , , , , , , ,