Analysis of the Gujarat High Court’s judgment granting bail to Virbhadrasinh Chauhan in a GST case involving Xerxes HR Services Pvt. Ltd.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that AO allowed the deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(v) of the Income Tax Act without adequate inquire. Accordingly, revisionary jurisdiction u/s. 263 rightly invoked as order passed by AO was erroneous and prejudicial to interest of revenue.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that Form No. 35A signed by the Authorized Representative is only an irregularity which is curable u/s. 292B of the Income Tax Act and not an illegality. Thus, order set aside with a direction to pass order on merits.
The petitioner’s challenge to the notice dated 23.06.2024, issued u/s. 143(2) of the Act, is premised on the basis that it has been issued by an officer, who is not a „prescribed income-tax authority’.
Mere omission /oversight or adherence to misinterpreted regulations could not be equated to suppression of facts or willful misrepresentation to invoke the extended limitation period under Section 11A of the Act.
ITAT Chennai allowed the appeal of Tractors and Farm Equipment Ltd, overturning the penalty under section 271(1)(c) for inaccurate income particulars.
Karnataka HC confirmed the date of online acknowledgment as the filing date for appeals under CGST Act in Hitachi Energy India Ltd. case.
Madras High Court set aside assessment orders signed by the same officer in dual capacity, citing procedural inconsistencies in S.R.S. Constructions case.
The Ministry of Finance has increased the PMMY loan limit to Rs. 20 lakh, aiding entrepreneurs’ growth and funding needs.
Mumbai court sentences former CGST Superintendent and his wife to 2-4 years in prison for possessing disproportionate assets. Total fine: ₹2 lakh.
