NCLAT Delhi held that continuing Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process [CIRP] not justified as Corporate Debtor has sufficient funds to discharge the admitted claims of CoC. Thus, adjudicating authority rightly terminated CIRP of Corporate Debtor.
CESTAT Kolkata held that club not being an advertising agency, service tax cannot be levied for advertisement published in souvenir or any display carried out in club premises. Accordingly, service tax demand set aside.
Calcutta High Court held that Kolkata Municipal Corporation cannot levy advertisement tax without framing regulations or without the budget estimate prescribing the rates at which advertisement tax may be levied. Thus, demand notice on Cricket Association of Bengal bad-in-law.
ITAT Kolkata held that filing of Form No. 67 is directory and no mandatory and the credit for foreign taxes cannot be denied for mere delay in filing the Form No. 67. Accordingly, appeal of the assessee allowed.
ITAT Delhi held that deduction under section 54F of the Income Tax Act allowable since the provisions of section 54F allows for construction of the property within a period of three years. Accordingly, appeal allowed.
Himachal Pradesh High Court held that arrest under section 19 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act [the PMLA Act] justified as reasons to believe that petitioner is guilty of an offence under the PMLA. Accordingly, petition dismissed.
ITAT Delhi held that the seat of Tribunal and/or jurisdiction of concerned Hon’ble High Court would depend upon where seat of the Assessing Officer who has passed the assessment order. Thus, ITAT Delhi Bench do not have territorial jurisdiction as assessment order are based by AO in Lucknow.
ITAT Bangalore held that expansion of scope of limited scrutiny without obtaining required prior approval as directed under CBDT Order No. F.No.225/402/2018/ITA.II dated 28.11.2018 is bad-in-law and hence order of AO is liable to be quashed.
Madras High Court held that delay of more than 17 years in adjudication of show cause proceeding without justifiable reasons is arbitrary and offending under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Thus, proceedings are dropped and writ petition is allowed.
ITAT Jaipur held that newly inserted Explanation 2(a) to Sec. 263 does not give unfettered powers to Commissioner to revise each order. Held that revisionary proceeding u/s. 263 not justified as order not erroneous or prejudicial to interest of revenue.
