The Bombay High Court held that rejection of a manual GST appeal was unsustainable where DRC-07 was not available on the GST portal. The matter was remanded for reconsideration under the proviso to Rule 108 of the CGST Rules.
The Tribunal ruled that corpus donations cannot be taxed merely because Section 12AA registration was granted subsequently. Once registration existed before processing of return, exemption under Section 11 could not be denied.
Applying Exception 2 to Section 375 IPC, Rajasthan HC ruled that no rape offence could be made out against a legally wedded husband where wife was an adult. Court therefore quashed the FIR and all consequential proceedings.
The Tribunal held that agricultural land situated beyond notified municipal limits is not a capital asset under the Income Tax Act. It deleted the entire capital gains addition arising from sale of such land.
The Allahabad High Court observed that throwing non-vegetarian food waste into the River Ganga could hurt the religious sentiments of the Hindu community. However, the Court granted bail after finding that the accused had expressed regret and the investigation would continue unaffected.
The Tribunal held that amount received on surrender of a pension policy could not be taxed as Income from Other Sources without proper examination of Section 80CCC(2). The entire addition of ₹10.40 lakh was deleted.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that no unexplained investment addition could survive where the booked property deal was cancelled and funds were refunded. The ruling emphasized verification of actual payment flow and subsequent cancellation events.
The Tribunal held that capital introduced in a partnership firm cannot be treated as unexplained merely on suspicion when confirmations, bank statements, and source details are available. The entire addition of ₹29 lakh under Section 69A was deleted.
The Tribunal held that the AO failed to properly verify the genuineness of a cancelled property sale transaction before accepting the assessee’s claim of no capital gains. It ruled that lack of inquiry justified revision under Section 263.
The Tribunal ruled that the Revenue must establish a direct connection between seized material and the assessee’s taxable income before invoking Section 153C. Mechanical initiation of proceedings for multiple years was declared invalid.
