ITAT Delhi held that reassessment cannot survive when additions are made on issues unrelated to the reasons recorded for reopening. The ruling reinforces that the scope of reassessment must remain confined to the original basis of jurisdiction.
The Delhi ITAT held that reassessment initiated beyond three years was invalid because the alleged escaped income represented by profit embedded in commodity transactions was only Rs. 4.27 lakh, far below the Rs. 50 lakh threshold under Section 149(1)(b).
This article explains the extent of the burden of proof under Section 155 of the CGST Act. The key takeaway is that recipients must establish genuine transactions but are not required to guarantee supplier conduct beyond their control.
CMA data forms the backbone of working capital assessment by helping banks determine genuine funding requirements and borrower contribution. It also serves as the benchmark for ongoing monitoring and stock audits.
The revised ITR forms for AY 2026-27 introduce new tax slabs, expanded ITR eligibility, and enhanced disclosure requirements. Understanding these changes can help taxpayers file accurate returns and avoid compliance issues.
Dual Control Without Coordination: How CGST–SGST Jurisdiction Gaps Are Trapping Taxpayers in Parallel Proceedings Overview One of the most troubling administrative failures in the GST regime is not found in the charging provision, the rate notifications, or even in the return architecture. It is found in the everyday working of jurisdiction. On paper, GST is […]
The Telangana High Court refused to interfere with the assessment order in writ proceedings, citing the availability of an effective statutory appeal remedy. The Court held that all factual and legal grounds, including alleged violation of natural justice, can be raised before the appellate authority.
The Telangana High Court set aside the rejection of a GST appeal that had been dismissed on limitation grounds despite being filed within the 45-day period granted by an earlier High Court order. The ruling underscores that litigants should not suffer for inadvertent procedural lapses.
The Telangana High Court permitted the taxpayer to file an appeal against a Section 73 order despite the delay in approaching the appellate authority. The Court also directed that no coercive action be taken for two weeks, provided the appeal is filed with the statutory pre-deposit.
Stakeholders identified persistent issues in GST registration, cancellations, and refund processing affecting MSMEs. The consultation recommended procedural simplification and stronger taxpayer safeguards.
