ITAT Bangalore held that interest on housing loan is allowed to be included in cost of acquisition of capital asset under section 48 of the Income Tax Act provided the same is not claimed as deduction u/s. 24(b). Accordingly, matter restored back to AO for verification.
ITAT Delhi held that revisionary proceedings under section 263 of the Income Tax Act is not justifiable since proper enquiry and examination was made and therefore, there is no error in the order of the AO thus, it is not pre-judicial to the interest of the Revenue.
CESTAT Chennai held the denial of import exemption customs authority not justifiable since import was made under DGFT licence which was valid at the time of import and was cancelled by DGFT much later. Accordingly, order set aside and appeal allowed.
Madras High Court held that levy of late fee under section 47(2) of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 is upheld for non-filing of annual return in Form GSTR-9 for F.Y. 2021-2022 after expiry of period of three years from due date of furnishing of said return.
NCLT Cuttack held that application for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process [CIRP] under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code [IBC] admitted against Corporate Debtor [Fortune Spirit Limited] as debt and default in payment of debt duly proved.
Karnataka High Court held that the provisions of Rule 7 of the Central Excise Rules and Section 12B of the Central Excise Act are not applicable in cases of provisional assessment. Accordingly, appeals of revenue stand dismissed.
Madras High Court held that Tribunal cannot convert itself into a disciplinary authority and impose punishment of censure. Accordingly, order punishment of censure is liable to be quashed and set aside.
Madras High Court held that section 173(5) Cr.P.C., 1973, is attracted only to cases instituted on police reports. Accordingly, the same cannot be invoked based on a police report but on a private complaint under the Central Excise Act, 1944.
NCLT Delhi held that application filed u/s. 12A of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code [IBC] for withdrawal of CIRP allowed as unconditional consent accorded by the sole Financial Creditor. Accordingly, application allowed.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that addition of LTCG u/s. 68 of the Income Tax Act by treating transaction as bogus cannot be sustained since shares were sold via recognized stock exchange and Security Transaction Tax [STT] duly paid and assessee’s involvement in manipulation of price not pointed.
