The court held that Section 74 cannot be used unless fraud, wilful misstatement, or suppression with intent to evade tax is specifically alleged and proved. In the absence of these ingredients, the entire GST proceeding is without jurisdiction and must fail.
The dispute concerned whether internal road works were taxable at 12% or 18% under GST. The High Court set aside the higher rate levy on road works and directed reassessment after considering the public road certificate.
ITAT deleted disallowance of depreciation, loan interest, and fuel expenses after finding cars were registered in the company’s name. Ad-hoc personal use disallowance without evidence was held unsustainable.
The issue concerned an incorrect prayer reproduced in an appellate order. The Tribunal allowed correction and directed insertion of the proper prayer from the application.
The Tribunal held that for years where assessments were already completed, additions under Section 153A cannot survive without incriminating material found during search. Large additions based on third-party statements and assumptions were therefore deleted.
The Tribunal held that interest on income-tax refund is taxable in the year of receipt and qualifies for Section 80-IA deduction, regardless of the year to which the refund relates.
The High Court held that failure to grant a personal hearing before passing an adverse GST order violates Section 75(4), rendering the demand invalid.
The case examined whether short delays in filing mandatory exemption forms during the pandemic could be condoned. The High Court held that minor delays caused by COVID-19 were condonable and directed reprocessing of the return with exemption benefits.
The court examined whether possession assistance could be granted when the assignee’s rights were pending approval. It upheld the rejection, holding that verification of a valid assignment is mandatory under Section 14.
The Tribunal held that a deduction cannot be disallowed merely due to delayed filing of Form 10CCB when it was available before processing. Procedural delay does not defeat a valid deduction claim.
