NCLT Mumbai approved ACME Cleantech Solutions Private Limited resolution plan as moved by resolution professional of Reliance Big Private Limited The present Application is moved by Mr. Rohit Ramesh Mehra (“Applicant”), Resolution Professional of Reliance Big Private Limited (“Corporate debtor”) under Section 30(6) r/w Section 31 (l) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
Kerala High Court held that commencement of GST audit u/s. 65 means date on which records and documents are made available by registered person. Hence, GST audit ought to be completed within 3 months from the said date.
Madras High Court held that extension of period for bringing immovable property to sale by auction is justifiable since time limit got extended as per proviso to rule 68B. Thus, writ petition stands dismissed.
ITAT Jaipur held that assessee just needs to establish that the amount has come from the bank account of the cash-creditors. Assessee is not required to prove the source of the amount in the bank accounts of the cash creditors. Thus, addition u/s. 68 deleted since genuineness of transaction proved.
ITAT Kolkata held that issuance of notice under section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act by non-jurisdictional Assessing Officer renders assessment bad-in-law. Thus, assessment order is bad-in-law and hence liable to be quashed.
Gujarat High Court held that refund entitled to assessee on the basis of order passed by CIT(A) cannot be unjustifiably adjusted against subsequent year’s demand. Accordingly, AO directed to credit refund amount in bank account of the petitioner.
Madras High Court held that post settlement of disputed under Chapter XIX-A of the Income Tax Act, the continuance of the proceedings u/s. 10(1) of the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015 cannot be allowed to continue. Thus, writ allowed.
ITAT Mumbai held that change of method of accounting from mercantile to cash system for recording interest income on loan due to financial distress at the end of borrower is justifiable and legitimate.
Madras High Court held that disciplinary proceedings initiated against Deputy Commissioner of GST is liable to be set aside since there was no negligence or omission on the part of the petitioner.
The borrowers defaulted on loan repayment, prompting the petitioner to initiate proceedings under the SARFAESI Act. Physical possession of the property was taken on 05.12.2023.
