The case examined confirmation of a substantial addition without adequate factual analysis. The Tribunal ruled that justice demands a fresh decision after full consideration of bank statements and supporting records.
ITAT Jaipur held that application for approval under section 80G inadvertently considered as application under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act is against principle of natural justice. Accordingly, matter restored back to CIT(E).
The High Court held that assessment orders under Section 62 of the CGST Act automatically lapse once pending returns are filed with late fee, barring recovery action.
The dispute concerned rejection of explanation for cash deposits due to lack of documentation. The Tribunal ruled that evidence relating to sale of inherited assets was vital and must be examined afresh by the tax authorities.
CESTAT Kolkata held that the allegation of clandestine removal of goods cannot be sustained on the basis of documents recovered from such third-party premises. Accordingly, issue answered in favour of the appellant.
The Court ruled that non-disclosure of a subsisting mortgage amounts to fraud, entitling the buyer to refund of advance despite alleged payment defaults.
The CESTAT held that penalties under Sections 114 and 114AA cannot be imposed without establishing the appellant’s knowledge of mis-declaration. The appeal succeeded, and fines were set aside.
The Jharkhand High Court granted bail to an accused in a GST evasion case involving Rs. 22 crore, considering the petitioner’s four-month custody and the statutory maximum punishment.
The issue was whether compensation awarded for the death of a minor was grossly inadequate. The Supreme Court recalculated compensation using minimum wages, 40% future prospects, and multiplier 15, substantially enhancing the award.
The dispute concerned the scope of the deeming provision under Section 103 of the MSCS Act. The Court ruled that the deeming fiction operates only when the society’s objects, not merely its operations, span multiple States.
