ITAT Delhi restored a Section 69A addition after holding that the assessee failed to produce evidence supporting its claim that the seized cash was meant for inter-branch transfer. The Tribunal found the explanation unsupported and inconsistent with available records.
CESTAT Hyderabad held that seizure of foreign-marked gold without separately recorded reasons under Section 110 of the Customs Act was legally defective. The Tribunal ruled that subsequent confiscation and penalties could not survive.
ITAT Rajkot held that revision under section 263 was not sustainable where the Assessing Officer had already conducted extensive verification of agricultural income and expenses. The Tribunal observed that detailed notices, documentary evidence, and independent inquiries were part of the original assessment proceedings.
The Allahabad High Court held that a three-month gap between the alleged harassment and the student’s suicide broke the necessary proximity required under Section 306 IPC. The Court quashed criminal proceedings against the teacher due to lack of direct instigation and mens rea.
The updated Annexure-B utility now requires detailed invoice-wise reporting and system-based reconciliation with GSTR-2B and GSTR-3B, increasing compliance requirements for GST refund claims.
The Income Tax Act, 2025 replaces old reassessment provisions with Sections 279 to 286 and increases reopening timelines in certain cases. Tax professionals must carefully examine applicability based on the relevant tax year.
The article explains how departmental GST audits can identify compliance gaps, strengthen internal controls, and reduce future litigation and penalty exposure through early corrective action.
The amended Finance Bill 2026 abolishes the Tax Recovery Officer’s power to arrest and detain taxpayers for recovery of dues. The move is positioned as a taxpayer-friendly reform aimed at reducing coercive recovery measures.
ITAT Delhi held that addition under Section 41(1) cannot be made without proving cessation of liability. The Tribunal found that family loans continued to remain payable and were merely reclassified in the capital account.
ITAT Raipur held that additions based on server data, search records, and investigation reports cannot survive if such material is not supplied to the assessee. The Tribunal ruled that denial of rebuttal opportunity violates principles of natural justice.
