Tribunal held that the Commissioner (Appeals) erred in deciding classification without first addressing limitation under Section 129D(3) of the Customs Act, and remanded the case for fresh consideration on the time-bar issue alone.
ITAT Delhi remanded the case for re-examination of foreign remittances from Russia, directing the Assessing Officer to verify if the receipts were genuine trade receivables amid allegations of over-invoiced exports.
The Madras High Court directed the Customs Department to provisionally release second-hand Digital Multifunction Printers (MFDs) despite the department’s objection regarding environmental clearance. The release is subject to final customs adjudication.
The ITAT set aside the rejection of Life Eternal Trusts 80G registration and remanded the case to re-evaluate if the trusts religious expenses exceeded the 5% limit. The Tribunal instructed the CIT to consider the trust’s new evidence on expense miscategorization.
Madras HC directed Customs to provisionally release used Digital Multifunction Printers (MFDs) under Section 110A, subject to final adjudication. HC ruled that MFDs are not prohibited under HOW Rules and ordered provisional release, applying benefit of doubt and prior court decisions.
CESTAT Hyderabad held that a service tax demand cannot be dismissed merely because payment was made in advance and remanded the matter for verification of the period of service receipt.
ITAT Cuttack deleted a ₹15.45 lakh demonetization cash deposit addition based on bank confirmation. Tribunal also reduced estimated net profit rate for wholesale trader from 1.5/% to 1/%
ITAT Chennai remanded a Section 69A unexplained cash deposit addition back to the AO. The assessee is permitted to submit new evidence, including bank statements, for fresh consideration of the claim.
Allahabad HC set aside AAR s order, remanding the GST exemption case for DGCA-approved pilot training to be decided in light of the Ministry of Finance’s circular clarifying the exemption under Notification 12/2017.
Kerala High Court clarified that proceedings under Section 73 apply only where tax is unpaid, short-paid, or wrongly availed. Since the taxpayer only adjusted ITC under the wrong head without causing loss to the exchequer, the GST demand was quashed.
