The Tribunal held that a reassessment notice issued beyond three years was invalid because approval was taken from the PCIT instead of the PCCIT. The ruling reiterates that the 2023 amendment to Section 151 cannot be applied retrospectively.
Court ruled that protections under the RBI Circular apply only to third-party breaches and cannot be invoked to recast personal transactions as fraud. Since bank records showed the petitioners’ own involvement, the writ was dismissed.
The Tribunal held that receipts on surrender of tenancy rights were capital in nature and not taxable under section 56(2)(x). It ruled that such receipts qualify for capital gains treatment and related exemptions.
The Tribunal held that once purchases are proven bogus, the entire amount must be added back, rejecting the CIT(A)’s 8% profit estimation. The ruling confirms that unexplained expenditure cannot be allowed under section 69C.
The Court ruled that Section 148 notices issued by the local Assessing Officer, following orders under Section 148A(d), are legally valid. It rejected arguments that such notices must be issued facelessly under the 2022 Scheme. This establishes that notice issuance and faceless assessment are distinct processes.
The Delhi High Court quashed charges against the petitioner in a corruption case, finding intercepted calls insufficient to establish grave suspicion of conspiracy.
The Court held that intercepted calls and investigation records did not establish demand or acceptance of illegal gratification. It affirmed that no material linked the accused to the alleged conspiracy, upholding the quashing of charges.
The Ministry of Finance has extended the duty on textured tempered glass while a statutory review evaluates potential injury to Indian industry. The extension keeps the existing levy active through June 2026.
Delhi High Court ruled that a pre-deposit made under the Central Excise head satisfies the statutory requirement when the Service Tax portal is non-functional, allowing the appeal to proceed on merits.
The High Court rejected the writ petition challenging GST demand for alleged fraudulent ITC, citing the complexity of factual issues. Petitioners are allowed to appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act.
