ITAT Ahmedabad held that non-compliance to notices issued u/s. 250 by CIT(A) resulted into delayed appellate proceedings. Accordingly, cost of Rs. 5,000 imposed on the assessee for lack of diligence.
Karnataka High Court held that proceedings initiated against deceased person are null and void and the same cannot be continued against his/her legal representative. Accordingly, order of Single Judge not interfered.
ITAT Mumbai held that addition towards bogus purchases unwarranted as GP rate on sale of alleged bogus purchases is more than the GP rate of other purchases. Accordingly, appeal allowed the addition deleted.
CESTAT Allahabad held that imposition of penalty u/s. 114AA of the Customs Act not justified since customs broker was not held responsible for forging any documents for clearance of goods. Accordingly, penalty imposed u/s. 114AA set aside.
Kerala High Court held that revisionary proceedings by PCIT u/s. 263 rightly exercised since claim of provision for bad and doubtful debts was assumed by assessing officer to be correct without adequate enquiry. Accordingly, appeal dismissed.
ITAT Agra held that addition towards interest paid on CC is liable to be deleted since interest free advance given to potato growers (farmers) were out of the business expediency. Accordingly, addition deleted and appeal allowed.
ITAT Kolkata held that expenditure towards sales promotion expenses allowed as deduction under section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act since bills along with other evidences related to the same is duly produced. Accordingly, appeal allowed.
ITAT Kolkata held that condonation of delay in filing of an appeal is liable to be allowed as sufficient cause shown. Accordingly, order of CIT(A) set aside and matter restored back for fresh adjudication.
ITAT Agra held that ex-parte dismissal of appeal, as notices issued by CIT(A) were not compiled, without adjudicating issues on merits is in violation of section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act. Hence, order set aside and matter remitted back to CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
Delhi High Court held that imposition of penalty under section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [CGST Act] for minor procedural breaches is unjustified. Accordingly, writ petition disposed of and penalty set aside.
