Delhi High Court held that repeated placing and removing from the call book is not valid justification for non-adjudication of show cause notice for more than 10 years. Accordingly, order passed after 10 years is not sustainable and liable to be quashed.
Anup Kumar Singh Vs Union of India & others (Calcutta High Court) Calcutta High Court held that issuance of provisional seizure order under Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 [FEMA] is in complete disregard of the moratorium prescribed by section 33(5) of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code [IBC] since the provisions of the IBC would override the […]
Anil Kumar Singh Vs Union of India (Patna High Court) Patna High Court held that not obtaining registration under service tax alone cannot be reason to believe that there is existence of fraud or wilful suppression with intent to evade payment of service tax. Thus, extended period of limitation not applicable. Facts- The petitioner is […]
Patna High Court held that reassessment proceedings initiated on the basis of incorrect information which was not supported by any material is not sustainable in law. Accordingly, order passed thereon is liable to be quashed.
Gospel India Ministries Gutkula Vs CIT (ITAT Nagpur) ITAT Nagpur held that rejection of application in Form 10AB for grant of registration u/s. 12AB of the Income Tax Act on the ground of quoting of wrong provision not justifiable since quoting wrong provision cannot be held to be fatal to militate against well-deserved beneficial provision. […]
ITAT Ahmedabad restored matter of registration under section 80G(5)(iii) of the Income Tax Act to the file of CIT(E) for verification that expenditure on religious activities was within the threshold limit of 5% as specified under section 80G(5) of the Act.
Delhi High Court held that imposition of penalty justified since appellant holding IEC registration ought to have acted responsibly and ensured that the same was not misused by any third party. Thus, penalty imposed on the appellant justified since appellant was aware of IEC being misused.
Bombay High Court held that amalgamated company not having obtained approval of Central Government is entitled to adjust the Written Down Value [WDV] of the assets of amalgamating companies and claim depreciation on such adjusted written down value.
Delhi High Court held that reasonable payment for services rendered to persons specified u/s. 13(3) of the Income Tax Act by the trust is justifiable and such payment wouldn’t fall within the exception of section 13(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that revisionary proceedings under section 263 of the Income Tax Act is not sustainable in law since Assessing Officer examined the aspect of disallowance of bogus losses on sale of steel scrap and took plausible view.
