The Tribunal held that failure to return a seized laptop and documents used for defence vitiated the adjudication and remanded the matter for fresh consideration.
Calcutta High Court held that the right of redemption retained with the borrower under section 13(8) of SARFAESI Act till the Sale is confirmed and sale certificate is issued. Accordingly, revisional applicable is liable to be set aside.
Chhattisgarh High Court held that there is no illegality or irregularity in sanctioning loans on the same day since no rule prohibited such sanction. The prosecution has not established any dishonest intention on the part of the Branch Manager at the time of sanctioning the loan.
ITAT Mumbai held that disallowance under section 14A of the Income Tax Act cannot exceed the amount of exempt income earned by the assessee during the year under consideration. Accordingly, the matter is restored back to file of AO for exercising the computation of disallowance u/s 14A.
The rules clarify how rent-free or concessional housing is taxed differently for government and private employees, depending on location and salary structure.
The Tribunal ruled that failure to formally intimate amalgamation sustained the assessment, applying Mahagun Realtors, while striking down mechanical expense disallowances.
Delhi High Court held that summons under section 70 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act [CGST Act], is issued for gathering information and providing an opportunity to produce documents, it cannot be considered to be initiation of proceedings against the petitioner. Thus, writ dismissed as premature.
The Authority ruled that electric motor parts used in EV axles cannot be treated as motor vehicle parts and must be classified under Chapter 85 as per Section XVII exclusions.
The authority held that smartwatch bands merely secure the watch and do not contribute to communication or electronic functions, warranting classification as watch bands under Heading 9113.
CESTAT Delhi held that revocation of Customs Broker licence justified since it was involved in filing benami shipping bills in the name of some other IEC holder with intend to export prohibited goods. Accordingly, order upheld and appeal dismissed.
