The High Court held that a works contract for supply, installation, and commissioning of machinery was indivisible. The Court allowed tax benefits under Section 3(F)(2)(b) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act.
The ITAT held that without pinpointing specific defects in books or vouchers, an arbitrary ₹50 lakh disallowance cannot stand. The ruling confirms that estimation cannot replace factual verification.
The 2025 amendment introduces the term “ineligible director” and prescribes a drawing-of-lots method for board reconstitution, clarifying removal and succession procedures in co-operative banks.
The 2025 amendment mandates unique identification marking for specified goods and imposes penalties for non-compliance, strengthening tracking and accountability under Manipur GST.
The court held that non-disclosure of CESS in GSTR-3B, corrected in GSTR-9, was revenue neutral. The appellate authority was directed to reconsider the case.
The 2025 amendment changes reporting dates in Forms VIII and X from alternate Fridays to the 15th and last day of the month, standardizing monthly compliance for banking companies.
The Tribunal held that the assessee cannot be penalised for mistakes of his CA and condoned a two-year delay. The matter was remanded for de novo assessment, reaffirming natural justice principles.
The Court set aside the Tribunal’s order after holding that additional Form F declarations worth over ₹15 crore must be considered. It directed authorities to verify the forms and determine tax liability accordingly.
A genuine FTC claim of ₹1.03 crore was partly disallowed due to a technical placement error in Form 67. The Tribunal restored the claim and sent it to the AO for verification and proper allowance.
The Court held that a notice fixing a hearing merely for uploading an order serves no purpose and violates procedural norms. It directed the authority to issue a valid notice and decide the appeal afresh.
