The Telangana High Court granted pre-arrest bail in a ₹97.25 crore GST ITC case after observing that the allegations were primarily documentary in nature. The Court held that custodial interrogation was not shown to be necessary.
The Calcutta High Court condoned a 430-day delay after holding that the death of the assessee’s authorized representative constituted sufficient cause in the faceless tax regime. The Court set aside the ITAT’s dismissal order and restored the appeal for adjudication on merits.
NCLT Mumbai held that the impugned intra-group assignment transaction did not prejudice creditors or alter their position. The Tribunal ruled that essential ingredients of fraudulent trading under Section 66 of the IBC were not established.
The Customs Authority for Advance Rulings held that classification of roasted areca nuts under Heading 2008 had already been conclusively settled by the Madras High Court. The authority ruled that tariff restructuring under the Finance Act, 2025 did not create a fresh classification issue.
The CCPA held that failure to disclose the specific courses attended by successful NEET and IIT-JEE candidates amounted to concealment of material information. The authority imposed a ₹5 lakh penalty and directed discontinuation of the advertisements.
The Mumbai ITAT held that the AO and CIT(A) failed to properly verify bank statements, credit card records, and company ledger accounts before making the addition under Section 68. The matter was restored for fresh examination and reconciliation of records.
Rule 14A introduces a fast-track GST registration process for small taxpayers with limited B2B tax liability. The article explains eligibility conditions, filing restrictions, and the procedure for switching to normal registration.
The ITAT held that old unsecured loan balances carried forward from earlier years cannot automatically be treated as unexplained cash credits in a subsequent year.
The ITAT held that reassessment notices issued on 25.07.2022 were time-barred since the Revenue had only one surviving day left under the Supreme Court’s Rajeev Bansal limitation formula.
The Supreme Court affirmed that continuous non-filing of GSTR-3B despite issuing invoices and collecting GST amounts to wilful suppression under Section 74. The ruling rejects financial hardship as a defence against GST compliance failures.
