Held that contention that during moratorium imposed u/s 14 of IBC, Adjudicating authority shall not pass an order u/s 66 of IBC, is without any merit
Held that interest paid on convertible debentures are allowable as expenditure u/s. 36(1)(iii) of the Act. Such interest cannot be treated as interest on equity.
Held that assessee established identity of the creditors by bringing on record their PANs and complete addresses of the creditors. Hence addition u/s 68, without bringing out any adverse or cogent material to dispute the credit worthiness of the creditors and genuineness of the transactions, is unsustainable
Held that application u/s 11(6) for appointment of an arbitrator after the period of cause of action got extinguished is not maintainable
Held that section 18 of MSMED Act and section 7 of A&C Act clarifies that dispute can be referred to Facilitation Council for conciliation and subsequent arbitration if required. Thus, arbitration clause in agreement would not bar reference of dispute to the Facilitation council
Held that confirming demand of service tax without into the details of arrangements by simply relying on the documents like income tax returns, profit & loss account and balance sheet is unsustainable in law
Held that revisionary proceedings bad in law as initiated without conducting any enquiry or verification to establish that the assessment order is unsustainable
Held that provisions of section 23(1)(c) are applicable when the property was let out for two or more years, however, was vacant for the whole previous year. Accordingly, income tax on rental income on a notional base doesn’t apply.
Held that notice issued u/s. 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) needs to specify the limb under which penalty proceedings are initiated. Penalty not leviable, in absence of the specification of the limb.
Held that as the assessee has already abandoned its statutory right of filing an appeals and has consciously taken decision. Therefore, delay of more than 10 years cannot be condoned without valid and genuine ground.