ROC Chennai penalised a company and its director for delayed filing of financial statements under Section 137 of the Companies Act, 2013. The ruling confirms that prolonged litigation and staff shortage cannot excuse statutory MCA filing delays.
The Pune ITAT held that reassessment beyond four years based on the same hawala purchase material already examined during scrutiny amounted to a mere change of opinion. The reassessment proceedings were therefore quashed as invalid.
The Tribunal observed that earlier additions were primarily based on DRI show-cause notices without independent investigation by the Assessing Officer. Fresh adjudication was ordered after admission of subsequent customs findings.
The article explains that each crypto card transaction is treated as a taxable transfer of virtual digital assets under Indian tax law. It highlights the need for proper reporting, record-keeping, and tax planning for 2026 filings.
Credit card offers explained with 7 types and evaluation tips. Learn to compare rewards, fees, and benefits before applying.
The Income-tax Act, 2025 replaces old Sections 68 to 69D with a simplified sequential structure under Sections 102 to 106. The changes aim to improve clarity while retaining existing tax liabilities on unexplained income and assets.
LMPC Compliance regulates packaging, labeling, and sale of packaged commodities under the Legal Metrology framework in India. Businesses must follow mandatory declaration and registration requirements to avoid penalties and customs issues.
The Telangana High Court granted anticipatory bail to a Chartered Accountant accused in a share transfer fraud case, observing that the evidence was primarily documentary in nature. The Court held that custodial interrogation was not necessary in the circumstances.
Tribunal held that Section 159A of the Customs Act could not revive Rules 16 and 16A of repealed 1995 Drawback Rules where 2017 Rules showed a different legislative intention. Recovery proceedings initiated in 2022 were therefore held unsustainable.
CESTAT Chennai ruled that the BOOT water transmission agreement was a single indivisible works contract and not a trading activity. The Tribunal held that transfer of property in goods during execution did not convert the contract into sale of goods.
