The High Court quashed an assessment order passed without granting personal hearing despite a written request. It held that refusal on technical grounds violated principles of natural justice.
The Court ruled that excise duty refund received under an incentive scheme was a capital receipt and not taxable. It also rejected reduction from the block of assets.
The High Court set aside a GST order confirming ITC demand under Section 74 as the authority failed to consider the petitioner’s defence based on IBC moratorium. The matter was remanded for fresh hearing.
The Court found inconsistency in the service date of the show cause notice and held that no proper opportunity of hearing was given. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication.
The High Court dismissed the appeal holding that stock statements forming the basis of overdraft drawing power could not be disowned without contrary evidence. Addition was sustained after opportunities were granted to disprove the statements.
The Court set aside the Section 197 order holding that distribution fees were treated as royalty without concrete reasoning. It directed issuance of a NIL tax withholding certificate.
ITAT Mumbai held that reassessment beyond three years is invalid if approval is not obtained from the specified higher authority under Section 151(ii). The notice under Section 148 was declared void ab initio.
The Court ruled that issuing a common notice for different financial years violates established precedent, though fresh action may be taken in accordance with law.
The High Court held that delay beyond the maximum 120-day period under Section 107 of the GGST Act is uncondonable. Writ jurisdiction cannot override statutory limitation.
The Tribunal held that failure of the Assessing Officer to verify genuineness of a ₹30 lakh donation under Section 80GGC rendered the assessment erroneous and prejudicial to revenue, justifying revision under Section 263.
