Bombay High Court held that disqualification of village panchayat member under section 41(1)(h) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act merely because of non-payment of Grampanchayat taxes not justified.
Gujarat High Court held that service provided by the subsidiary company to its parent company in independent capacity doesn’t fall within the category of ‘intermediary service’ under section 2(13) of Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [IGST Act].
ITAT Ahmedabad held that addition on grounds other than grounds forming part of reasons recorded for reopening of assessment not justified. Accordingly, addition towards unexplained investment which didn’t form part of reasons liable to be deleted.
ITAT Pune held that addition toward unexplained expenditure is liable to be deleted since assessee inadvertently mentioned ‘commission expense’ instead of actual ‘construction expenses. Accordingly, appeal allowed.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that addition towards unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Income Tax Act not justified since loan transactions were done through banking channels and loans were repaid in short period. Accordingly, addition deleted.
ITAT Kolkata held that addition under section 69A of the Income Tax Act towards unexplained cash deposits rightly deleted since it is already part of the turnover of the business. Accordingly, appeal of revenue dismissed.
Delhi High Court held that ITAT cannot address the ground which remained unaddressed by CIT(A). Accordingly, matter restored back to CIT(A) to decide on the grounds that were not decided.
Punjab and Haryana High Court held that ITAT rightly deleted addition towards contribution to unrecognized provident fund as assessee has duly discharged its onus. Accordingly, petition disposed of.
Madras High Court held that provision for leave salary is not allowable as deduction under section 43B(f) of the Income Tax Act since deduction of actual payment is allowable and not of provision. Accordingly, question of law answered in favour of revenue.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that invocation of Revision proceedings under section 263 of the Income Tax Act after approval of the Resolution Plan by NCLT is against the Provisions of Law. Accordingly, revisionary proceedings quashed.
