Mere clerical error in filing GSTR-3B, when GSTR-1 reflected correct figures and no revenue loss occurred to department, could not be a ground for raising tax demands and taxpayer was permitted to rectify a clerical error made while filing GSTR-3B.
The ITAT Cochin has dismissed appeals by Trivandrum Cable Network (P.) Ltd., upholding additions made under Section 153A based on incriminating material found during search operations.
ITAT Cuttack deletes Section 271D penalty against Jogendra Kumar Panda, ruling cash transaction violation pertained to wrong assessment year.
Transfer or assignment of leasehold rights of industrial plots did not amount to a taxable supply under the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 as per provisions of Section 7(1)(a) read with Schedule II and Schedule III.
Jharkhand High Court dismissed the bail application since the twin condition as provided under Section 45(1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 is not being fulfilled. Also, there is sufficient material collected by ED to show that the applicant is prima facie guilty of the alleged offences.
Madras High Court held that option of admitted liability inadvertently not changed to disputed liability and hence petitioner was unable to file appeal. Accordingly, liberty is granted to file an appeal after depositing 15% of disputed tax amount.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that CIT(A)-NFAC has dismissed the appeal without rendering any findings on the merits of the case, which is against the principles of natural justice. Accordingly, order of CIT(A)-NFAC is set aside, and matter is restored to the file of CIT(A)-TP for fresh adjudication on merits.
ITAT Mumbai held that the Explanation to section 14A of the Income Tax Act inserted by the Finance Act, 2022 is prospective in nature and cannot be applied to assessment years preceding the amendment. Accordingly, appeal of revenue dismissed.
ITAT Delhi held that the benefit of working capital adjustment while computing the ALP has also not been borne in mind hence matter restored to the file of TPO/ AO for fresh determination in accordance with law.
Bombay High Court held that if municipal rateable value doesn’t depict correct annual value, AO can make independent enquiry under section 23(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act and determine the sum which the property is reasonably expected to fetch for purpose of determining annual value u/s. 22.
