The Tribunal held that section 269SS targets cash advances in property transactions. Cash received at the time of registration was found to be outside its scope.
The judgment clarified that delayed installment interest arises from a debtor–creditor relationship, not a service supply, and therefore cannot be subjected to GST.
The High Court quashed reassessment notices holding that mere receipt of dividends and capital loss does not establish sham transactions. Allegations against fund managers cannot automatically implicate investors.
ITAT Mumbai held that condoning a delay in filing an appeal does not replace the right to present submissions on merits and remanded the case for fresh adjudication.
The statutory regulator declined disclosure of a key committee report on foreign lawyers. The decision raises questions on transparency in policy-making affecting the legal profession.
The Tribunal held that amalgamation approved by the High Court cannot be treated as a sham or business reconstruction. Deduction under Section 80IC was upheld as the eligible unit continued unchanged.
CESTAT Chennai held that Zinc EDTA being used as fertilizers are classifiable under Customs Tariff Heading 3105 and not under Customs Tariff Heading 2922 4990 as held in impugned order. Accordingly, the appeals are allowed.
ITAT Hyderabad held that addition under section 69A of the Income Tax Act as unexplained money towards bogus long term capital gains not sustained since assessee has proved the genuineness of transactions of purchase and sale of shares as ordinary investor.
The Tribunal held that Section 69A applies only to money not recorded in books of account. Additions based on duly recorded, bank-routed transactions were found unsustainable.
The issue was whether payments for supplying in-flight entertainment content constituted royalty. The Tribunal held that mere provision and processing of licensed content without transfer of copyright does not amount to royalty under the India-UK DTAA.
