The Registrar of Companies imposed penalties for non-filing of AOC-4 for two consecutive financial years. The key takeaway is that financial difficulty is not a valid defence for statutory filing defaults.
The Tribunal held that increasing base prices after a GST rate reduction defeated the statutory mandate of Section 171. Profiteering was confirmed as the benefit of tax reduction was not passed on to consumers.
The adjudicating authority held that non-filing of Form AOC-4 for consecutive years violates Section 137 of the Companies Act. Financial difficulty was rejected as a valid defence, and penalties were upheld against both the company and its officers.
The competition regulator found a prima facie case that large-scale cancellations followed by higher fares may amount to abuse of dominance. A detailed investigation has been ordered to examine unfair pricing and restriction of services.
The Tribunal ruled that the PCIT lacked jurisdiction to revise an assessment when the very issue was already under challenge before the appellate authority. Parallel revision proceedings were held to be impermissible.
The proposals extend due dates for non-audit taxpayers and allow revised returns up to 12 months with late fees. The takeaway is more time to comply without forfeiting correction rights.
Additions based on survey-time valuation of machinery were deleted as the Assessing Officer had not rejected the books of account. Prior binding orders in the same case were followed, reaffirming settled law.
The Tribunal ruled that interest earned on Government grants parked under official directions cannot be divorced from the original grant. Denial of exemption was found to defeat the purpose of section 10(23C)(iiiab), leading to relief for the assessee.
The tribunal held that a debt recovery tribunal cannot reject a counter-claim after a binding appellate remand. Orders bypassing affirmed appellate directions and natural justice were set aside.
The issue was whether late filing of Form 10AB mandates rejection of registration. The Tribunal held that bona fide delay can be condoned and remanded the matter for fresh consideration.
