ITAT Bangalore deleted addition made under section 69A of the Income Tax Act towards unexplained money after examining the cash withdrawn and cash deposit amounts, since cash withdrawn is more than cash deposit.
ITAT Chennai held that cash received under unregistered will accepted as will furnished by the assessee not established as fabricated one by the department and there is no requirement in law to get the will registered.
Calcutta High Court directed respondent to file affidavit to decide validity of the instruction no. CBIC-240137/14/2022- Service Tax dated 28.10.2022 with respect to pre-deposit payment mode.
CESTAT Bangalore held that differential duty demand u/s. 28(4) of the Customs Act sustainable as investigation clearly established that product ‘Brush Cutter’ mis-declared and cleared as ‘Power Operated Reapers’.
PCIT set aside the assessment order and directed the Assessing Officer to pass fresh order and compute correct taxable income by giving opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Being aggrieved against the revision order, the assessee has preferred the present appeal.
Delhi High Court held that formation of opinion on the basis of material is necessary for exercising power of provisional attachment under section 83(1) of the CGST Act. Provisional attachment justified as exercise of estimating value of GST conducted.
In view of above facts, we restore this appeal back to the learned Assessing Officer with the direction to the assessee to substantiate the status of the assessee as trust and also eligibility of relevant provisions of Sections 11 and 12 by producing the registration u/s. 12AA of the Act.
The Revenue’s action in mulcting the penalty by asking the assessee to prove the reasonable cause [COVID- 19] with documentary evidence capable of suggesting non-application of mind by the tax authorities.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that invocation of revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 of the Income Tax Act not justified as view taken by PCIT was second view and the same is not permissible u/s. 263.
Himachal Pradesh High Court held that in view of the provisions of Section 151A of the Income Tax Act read with the Scheme dated 29th March, 2022 the notices issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officers and not in prescribed faceless manner are invalid and bad in law.
