The issue was whether section 68 additions could survive when loans were already repaid. The Tribunal held that once the assessee is no longer a beneficiary, such additions are unsustainable.
The authority held that non-filing of the annual return for FY 2023–24 attracts penalty under section 92(5). Continued default led to penalties on both the company and directors.
The authority held that late filing of PAS-6 violates Rule 9A(8) and attracts penalty under section 450. Subsequent compliance does not erase earlier default.
Failure to file PAS-6 within time attracted penalties under section 450 despite subsequent compliance. Timely half-yearly reporting of share capital remains mandatory.
Gujarat High Court held that notice under section 148A(b) cannot be issued for verification on the part of the Assessing Officer. Such verification is to be conducted u/s. 148A(a) prior to issuance of notice. Thus, order passed thereon is liable to be quashed and set aside.
ITAT Patna held that consolidated approval under section 153D of the Income Tax Act granted in mechanical manner by JCIT without application of mind is invalid and hence assessment framed thereon is liable to be quashed.
ITAT Hyderabad held that issuance of notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, post introduction of ‘Faceless Jurisdiction of Income tax Authorities Scheme, 2022, is bad and illegal in law. Accordingly, order passed thereon is quashed and set aside.
The tribunal held that revision under Section 263 is invalid where the Assessing Officer has examined the issue and adopted a plausible legal view. The PCIT cannot substitute his opinion merely because another interpretation is possible.
The government revised excise rules to formally define how maximum machine speed is calculated for tobacco packing machines. The key takeaway is a standardized formula based on RPM, gear ratio, and cups or funnels.
The tribunal ruled that statements of third parties cannot be relied upon unless the assessee is provided copies and allowed cross-examination. Denial of this right renders the additions legally untenable.
