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.
Madras High Court directed to expeditiously dispose of the appeal filed before Appellate Authority and also held that stay granted shall continue to operate till the disposal of pending appeal.
NCLT Mumbai held that payment made after Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process [CIRP] without consent of Interim Resolution Professional [IRP] is breach of moratorium as provided in Section 14 of the Code. Hence, payment is liable to be refunded back to Corporate Debtor.
Delhi High Court held that initiation of disciplinary proceedings against Joint Controller General of Accounts (Administration) based on office order dated 3rd April 2018 is legal since MOF has only allocated work relating to all disciplinary matter to MOS and there is no sub-delegation of work.
NCLAT Delhi held that beneficiary under the personal guarantee is fully entitled to initiate Personal Insolvency Resolution Process against personal guarantor u/s. 95 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC).
