The Calcutta High Court upheld the ITAT’s decision quashing the assessment after finding that the notice under Section 143(2) was issued by an officer lacking jurisdiction. The Court held that such a defect is incurable and strikes at the root of the proceedings.
The Uttarakhand High Court held that scheduling a personal hearing before the expiry of the time granted for filing a reply violated principles of natural justice. The assessment order was therefore set aside and remanded for fresh proceedings.
The Ahmedabad ITAT held that adjustments under Section 143(1)(a) cannot be sustained without evidence of prior intimation to the assessee. The appeal was allowed as the Revenue failed to produce proof of notice.
The Court held that although filing the audit report along with the return is directory, complete failure to furnish the report is fatal to the deduction claim. The ruling emphasizes that statutory benefits cannot be granted without substantive compliance.
The Supreme Court held that filing Form 3AA during assessment proceedings constituted sufficient compliance, even though it was not submitted with the return. The ruling clarifies that delayed filing before the final assessment order does not automatically defeat the claim.
The Court noted that the Revenue had not submitted any claim during the insolvency resolution process for the relevant assessment years. Following established precedent, the appeals were dismissed.
The ITAT Mumbai held that gifts of shares completed before the introduction of Section 56(2)(vii)(c) could not be taxed under that provision. The ruling clarifies that subsequent procedural formalities cannot alter the original date of transfer.
The Delhi ITAT held that unsigned reasons recorded for reopening assessment constituted a jurisdictional defect that invalidated the reassessment proceedings. The defect was not curable under Section 292B of the Act.
The Court set aside a GST demand order after finding that the personal hearing was scheduled before the last date for filing a reply. The ruling underscores that statutory hearing requirements cannot be reduced to a procedural formality.
Saurabh Kumar Gupta Vs Union of India (Allahabad High Court) The Allahabad High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the order dated 30.12.2025 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, Division-I, Lucknow, whereby a penalty of ₹38,12,904 was imposed upon the petitioner under Section 122(1)(A) of the CGST Act, 2017. The case arose […]
