The appellate authority dismissed the appeal as it was filed beyond the prescribed limitation period. The key takeaway is that delayed filings under section 454 are not maintainable.
Chhattisgarh High Court held that denial of refund claim on the basis of limitation cannot be justified, since amount during investigation was paid under bona fide belief and particularly, when the Department itself acknowledged non-liability. Accordingly, appeal is allowed.
The High Court held that complex issues on overlapping State and Central proceedings should be examined by the Appellate Authority. The Supreme Court has stayed the order after notice on the argument that duplicate proceedings are barred by statute.
The assessee alleged denial of opportunity and improper handling of evidence. The Tribunal agreed that the appellate order was passed without due consideration of records and remand findings. The matter was sent back for fresh adjudication in accordance with law.
The Supreme Court refused to interfere with a High Court order discharging an accused in a money laundering case. The ruling confirms that no grounds were made out to disturb the High Court’s assessment of the limited role attributed.
Madras High Court held that issuance of show cause notice under section 74 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 impermissible since tax already paid voluntarily and there was no tax liability to be paid at the time of issuance of show cause notice. Accordingly, notice quashed.
n: The Court ruled that denying ITC for supplier non-compliance results in cascading tax. Authorities must ensure GST taxes only value addition and not penalise genuine buyers.
Lenders had confirmed loans in response to statutory notices, yet additions were made. The Tribunal upheld deletion by CIT(A), stressing the importance of uncontroverted confirmations. The ruling reinforces evidentiary discipline in Section 68 cases.
NCLAT Delhi held that resignation from directorship of Corporate Debtor not a sufficient ground leading to revocation of his personal guarantee. Accordingly, application u/s. 95 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code rightly admitted for failure of repayment in respect of their guarantee obligation.
The Tribunal held that TCS credit cannot be denied when tax was collected from the assessee, even if the collector failed to deposit it.
