The Tribunal set aside the ex parte dismissal of the AY 2018-19 appeal, restoring the matter to CIT(A) for merits-based hearing. The assessee was allowed to present evidence regarding ₹3.74 crore unexplained investment and estimated profits.
Tripura High Court rules that collection of GST penalty without passing a formal order under Section 129(3) is unlawful, and directs refund with interest.
Delhi High Court sets aside GST orders passed without notice or opportunity for reply and remands the matter to the adjudicating authority for personal hearing.
AO treated ₹13 lakh cash deposits as unexplained, but ITAT found all deposits supported by cash book and bank self-cheques. Entire addition under section 68 was deleted.
Madras High Court relegates the GST classification dispute on Harpic and Lizol to the Deputy Commissioner, noting factual disputes and the availability of statutory remedies.
ITAT held reassessment invalid where AO acted on belated return without issuing mandatory 143(2) notice. Entire reassessment under sections 144/147 was quashed despite late filing of return.
The Tribunal held that delay in submitting Form 10B is curable, allowing the trust to claim income application under Section 11(1)(a) as it was filed prior to completion of assessment proceedings.
The Tribunal upheld CIT(A)’s deletion of ₹2.81 crore transfer pricing adjustment, ruling that selected comparables were functionally and financially dissimilar. PSM was maintained as the Most Appropriate Method, ensuring fair benchmarking of international transactions.
The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)’s deletion of Rs. 11.26 crore LTCG, noting the unregistered JDA could not constitute a transfer under Section 2(47)(v). Taxability arises only upon registration and statutory approvals.
Tribunal found the appellate order non-speaking, failing to consider multiple submissions including 54F claims and compensation deductions. The matter is remanded for comprehensive review and proper opportunity of hearing.
