The Supreme Court dismissed SLPs and upheld the High Court’s finding that reassessment notices lacked tangible material. The ruling reinforces that mere survey findings cannot justify reopening of assessments.
The tribunal remanded the case after finding insufficient evidence to prove that refund and Cenvat credit were not claimed on the same services. Refund eligibility will depend on verification of non-availment of dual benefits.
Court found that the appellant failed to clearly identify which exceptional clause applied. Since the tax effect was below Rs.2 crores and no valid exception was demonstrated, the Court held that there was no reason to entertain the appeal. Accordingly, the appeal and the connected application were dismissed.
The Tribunal ruled that absence of a Nodal Ministry certificate cannot deny exemption when goods were used in the intended project. The decision emphasizes substance over procedural compliance.
The court declined to decide intermediary classification and directed the petitioner to pursue remedies before the appellate authority. All issues were kept open for independent adjudication.
The Tribunal set aside orders where the assessee failed to appear and granted another opportunity. It emphasized adherence to natural justice while imposing a cost.
The Court held that rejection of NBFC registration surrender solely due to meeting PBC was unsustainable without giving an opportunity of hearing. RBI was directed to reconsider the application afresh.
The Tribunal upheld reopening under Section 147 as Form 26AS reflected substantial contract receipts despite no return being filed. It ruled that such information constitutes valid grounds for belief of income escaping assessment.
The court held that interest cannot be claimed where delay in receiving rent was caused by the landlord’s own inaction. Procedural compliance for withdrawal was found essential.
The Court held that the amendment to Rule 89(5) is clarificatory and applies retrospectively to earlier refund claims. Refund denial was set aside as authorities failed to consider binding legal developments.
