Observations regarding inconsistencies and possible backdating of documents led the Court to closely examine the claim. The case reflects interplay between arbitration findings and insolvency proceedings.
The Court held that procedural delay in filing Form 10B should not result in denial of exemption. It emphasized that substantive benefits under Sections 11 and 12 must be granted where eligibility exists.
The case involved penalty for failure to respond to statutory notices during assessment. The Tribunal reduced the penalty after both parties agreed on a lower amount to resolve the dispute.
The issue involved denial of exemption for failure to attach audited accounts with Form 10B. The Tribunal held such lapse to be procedural and directed reconsideration, emphasizing that substantive compliance cannot be denied for technical defects.
The Tribunal held that absence of commenced activities is not a valid ground to deny registration where objects are charitable and proposed activities align with them.
ITR-4 Sugam: End of Blind Presumptive Compliance?” The Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) has introduced a significant compliance change in the newly released ITR-4 (Sugam) for Financial Year 2025-26. The amendment potentially marks a major compliance shift under the presumptive taxation scheme.” Taxpayers opting for the presumptive taxation scheme under Sections 44AD, 44ADA and […]
Explore why composite GST notices across multiple years should be judged by severability, not invalidation, balancing tax recovery with statutory limits.
The issue involved challenge to provisional attachment under Section 83 of the CGST Act. The Court refused to interfere, holding that the petitioner must first exhaust the statutory remedy of filing objections under Rule 159(5).
The Court held that cancellation based on grounds not mentioned in the show cause notice violates natural justice. The order was set aside and registration restored with liberty for fresh proceedings.
The court ruled that cancellation was unsustainable where authorities ignored documents and passed non-speaking orders. It emphasized that decisions must reflect application of mind and proper evaluation of evidence.
