Vide the present appeal it is mainly contesting that when a cell phone is sold along with a charger, there is only one Maximum Retail Price (MRP) stated on the packaging and therefore, Entry 28 has to be read in the context of the said facts.
ITAT Surat held that addition under section 68 of the Income Tax Act treating transaction as bogus merely on the basis of suspicion, presumptions and probability is not sustainable in law. Accordingly, appeal of assessee allowed.
During the assessment proceedings, it was observed that the assessee sold two trademarks “Coldarin” and “Raricap”. The gains accrued on the transfer of both these capital assets gave rise to income chargeable to tax under the head “Capital Gains”.
ITAT Hyderabad held that disallowance under section 14A of the Income Tax Act is rightly deleted by CIT(A) since assessee has not earned any dividend income. Thus, when there is no dividend income, the provisions of section 14A are not applicable.
ITAT Nagpur held that addition under section 69C towards unexplained expenditure is liable to be deleted due to lack of corroborative and strong evidence. Accordingly, appeal of the department dismissed.
Gujarat HC allows IGST refund under Section 16(3)(b) and directs authorities to amend shipping bills in ICEGATE to resolve GST ID and PAN mismatch issues.
Madras High Court held that reopening of assessment u/s. 148 of the Income Tax Act based on the judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court judgement is tenable as Supreme Court has not given direction to reopen completed assessment.
ITAT Nagpur held that cultivation of mushroom falls within the purview of agriculture and hence income from sale of mushroom is agricultural income which is eligible for exemption under section 10(1) of the Income Tax Act.
Delhi High Court held that retrospective cancellation of GST registration without assigning reason in SCN and in final order is unjustifiable. Accordingly, writ allowed and order cancelling registration quashed.
Delhi High Court held that section 67(7) of the CGST Act mandates that notice of extension of the seizure is required to be issued to the assessee prior to conclusion of the six-month period. Thus, seized goods are directed to be released.
