PCIT was of the view that mere process of compression of natural gas cannot be considered to be a manufacturing activity for the purpose of claim of additional depreciation.
ITAT Delhi held that protective addition in the hands of assessee deleted as substantial addition already made in the hands of the assessee’s wife and tax is already paid on the same. Accordingly, addition deleted.
Rajasthan High Court accepted bail application in the case of issuance of fake GST invoice since maximum punishment for the alleged offence is five years and accused has already suffered custody of more than seven months.
ITAT Kolkata held that duty drawback is part of gross receipts for the purpose of calculation of ‘gross receipts’ under the presumptive taxation as per section 44AD of the Income Tax Act. Thus, appeal allowed.
ITAT Delhi held that merely because particular scrip is identified as penny stock it doesn’t mean all the transactions carried out in that scrip would be bogus. Addition, u/s. 68 deleted in absence of allegation of assessee being involved in any price rigging or price increase.
Kerala High Court held that charges collected for provision of sophisticated medical beds for providing optimum nursing care to expecting mothers is liable to luxury tax under the Kerala Tax on Luxuries Act, 1976.
Tribunal in the case of Yegneswari General Traders vs. ITO held that kaccha arahtias are concerned, the turnover does not include the sales effected on behalf of the principals and only the gross commission has to be considered for the purpose of 44AB.
ITAT Mumbai held that cash deposits were evidently business receipts, in absence of any other evidence of any other undisclosed source of income, the same cannot be considered as unexplained cash credit. Accordingly, addition under section 68 liable to be set aside.
NCLAT Delhi held that the amount given as share application money did not constitute a financial debt under Section 5(8) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016 (IBC). Thus, CIRP application u/s. 7 rightly rejected.
ITAT Surat held that rejection of application for regular approval of fund under section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act as time barred not justified in terms of relaxation of time period as per CBDT Circular no. 7/2024 dated 25.04.2024
