The case involved reopening of assessment on deduction under section 80P(2)(d). The Supreme Court dismissed the SLP as time-barred, leaving intact the High Court ruling that reassessment was invalid on a settled issue.
The court held that reopening of assessment was invalid since the deduction issue was already settled in favour of the assessee. It ruled that reassessment cannot be based on an issue covered by binding precedent.
The case involved disallowance of business expenses where activity was minimal. ITAT held that existence of even limited business justified partial allowance and restricted disallowance to ₹1 lakh.
The issue was whether delay in cheque clearance attracts TDS interest. ITAT held that payment date is the cheque tender date, and no interest is leviable if submitted within due date.
The issue was whether a show cause notice cancelling GST registration can be challenged via writ. The SC held it is not maintainable and allowed adjudication to proceed.
The issue involved large unsecured loans without full supporting evidence. ITAT held that identity and creditworthiness were not properly established and sent the matter back for fresh verification.
The case examined whether one officer can perform dual roles in GST proceedings. The court held that such overlap violates natural justice and set aside the appellate order.
The issue involved restriction of TDS credit due to mismatch between Form 26AS and return. ITAT held that such adjustments require verification and cannot be made under Section 143(1).
The Supreme Court rejected the Revenue’s appeal solely on limitation, holding that the delay explanation was inadequate. The ruling highlights strict adherence to timelines in filing SLPs.
The case examined validity of a show cause notice covering several years. The court held that GST law requires year-wise assessment, making such consolidated notices invalid.
