We are obsessed with fame and achievement, yet overlook the unseen perfection orchestrating existence: the unique design of every human, the body’s silent self-healing, and the Earth’s perfect, life-sustaining rotation around the Sun. This essay argues for shifting focus from external noise to the profound, everyday intelligence of life itself.
The Delhi High Court upheld an anti-profiteering order, ruling that merely increasing product quantity or volume after a GST rate reduction does not fulfill the requirement of passing the tax benefit to consumers. The anti-profiteering mechanism safeguards consumer interest, demanding lower prices, not unsolicited product changes, when GST rates drop.
The MCA V3 portal shifts Annual Return (MGT-7/7A) filing to a web-based system, replacing the old PDF form. It introduces mandatory disclosures, including Registered Office photographs/coordinates, gender-wise shareholding breakup, and integrated Secretarial Audit (MGT-8) certifications. Filers must use the new online mode or Excel Utility, affix DSCs of the designated director, and save data frequently before final submission.
The ITAT Delhi upheld the deletion of an addition for alleged penny stock LTCG under Section 68, ruling that an assessment for an unabated year under Section 153A requires incriminating material found during the search. Since the addition was based on general analysis, not seized documents, the Revenues appeal was dismissed. The key takeaway affirms the Supreme Courts mandate that completed assessments cannot be disturbed without specific incriminating evidence.
Tribunal held that Section 69A covers unexplained money, not loans recorded in books. As all 14 lenders confirmed transactions with evidence, ₹1.86 crore addition was deleted.
The ITAT Bangalore confirmed that an initial order’s failure to consider a binding High Court ruling on bad debt deductibility constitutes a mistake apparent from record. This allowed the bank to claim a deduction under Section 36(1)(vii) for non-rural bad debts via rectification, dismissing the Revenue’s appeal. The key takeaway is that disregarding settled jurisdictional law is a rectifiable error, not a debatable issue.
The ITAT Ahmedabad deleted the Section 36(1)(iii) disallowance of interest expense after the real estate firm successfully proved that the mutual fund investment in question was made using interest-free own funds, not borrowed capital. The ruling emphasizes that disallowance requires evidence of borrowed funds being diverted for non-business purposes.
The Tribunal held that income declared under Sections 44AE and 44AD by a transport HUF owning 10 trucks was valid. Additions for alleged profit diversion were deleted as the AO’s suspicion of tax evasion lacked evidence.
The ITAT deleted the entire addition made under Section 69A concerning demonetisation cash deposits, ruling in favor of a retired government employee. The Tribunal held that deposits from verifiable sources like gratuity, leave encashment, salary arrears, and loan repayment were genuinely explained and not unexplained income.
ITAT Ahmedabad confirmed the disallowance of Rs.1.21 crore in subcontract expenses because the taxpayer failed to provide sufficient corroborative evidence to substantiate the payments, especially those linked to a director’s relative. The Tribunal upheld the AO’s finding that the genuineness of the expenditure was not satisfactorily proved.
