The Tribunal held that the entire unaccounted turnover from alleged on-money receipts cannot be treated as taxable income. It ruled that reasonable hidden expenditure must be considered while estimating profits.
The Gujarat High Court held that even where on-money receipts are established, only the profit embedded in those receipts can be taxed. The Revenue’s appeal seeking taxation of the entire receipt was dismissed.
The ITAT Ahmedabad held that confirmations and banking documents alone were insufficient to establish genuine unsecured loans. The addition under Section 68 and related interest disallowance were upheld.
The Supreme Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition after the Gujarat High Court held that the Tribunal’s findings on the non-genuineness of unsecured loan transactions were based on appreciation of evidence and disclosed no perversity.
The Gujarat High Court upheld the Section 68 addition after holding that the Tribunal had properly examined the evidence and concluded that the unsecured loan transactions were not genuine.
The Karnataka High Court held that appeals filed by the Income Tax Department against inadequacy of sentence are not maintainable. It relied on an earlier Coordinate Bench decision and dismissed the appeals.
The Bombay High Court set aside the transfer of assessment jurisdiction after finding no cogent material or recorded reasons linking the assessee with the searched group. It held that a Section 127 transfer cannot be based on speculation.
The Madras High Court set aside a GST assessment order that was issued before the expiry of the time granted for responding to a reminder notice. The matter was remanded after directing payment of 10% of the disputed tax demand.
The Madras High Court set aside a GST assessment after finding that repeated notices uploaded only on the GST portal did not provide an effective opportunity to respond. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication with a personal hearing.
The Delhi High Court ruled that the use of registered trademarks as keywords in Google Ads amounts to use under the Trade Marks Act. However, such use alone does not automatically establish infringement.
