ITAT Ahmedabad held that where Commissioner (Appeals) passed ex-parte order in violation of principles of natural justice, one more opportunity should be granted to assessee. Accordingly, matter restored back to CIT(A) for de-novo consideration.
Delhi High Court held that approval accorded in terms of section 153D of the Income Tax Act in a mechanical manner without application of mind is unsustainable in law. Accordingly, appeal of revenue dismissed and assessment order quashed.
The TPO, however, was not satisfied with the process of computation of PLI made by the Assessee. Accordingly, the TPO has treated the expenses incurred by the foreign AE as part of the operating expenses.
A search and seizure action u/s.132 of the Act was conducted in the assessee’s case on 14.11.2019. AO observed that during the course of search action, a pen drive was found from the cabin of the Head-Cashier.
Supreme Court held that in disciplinary proceedings, the Disciplinary Authority is not required to be recorded detailed reasons in the order imposing punishment if he accepts the findings recorded by the Enquiry Officer.
It is well settled that once a statute prescribes a specific period of limitation, the Appellate Authority does not inherently hold any power to condone the delay in filing the appeal by invoking the provisions of Section 5 or 29 of the Limitation Act, 1963.
ITAT Jaipur held that addition under section 68 of the Income Tax Act towards unsecured loan is untenable since loans accepted were repaid in the same year and all the transactions were carried out through banking channels. Accordingly, appeal of revenue dismissed.
Gauhati High Court held that issuance of summary of the Show Cause Notice [SCN] doesn’t dispense with requirement of issuance of proper notice as per mandate of Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act. Accordingly, order set aside and writ allowed.
Supreme Court held that no penalty under section 271AAA(1) of the Income Tax Act when undisclosed income during course of search is admitted and paid tax with interest. Accordingly, penalty u/s. 271AAA(1) set aside.
Supreme Court held that State Government while applying amendment of Section 8(5) of the Central Sales Tax Act by the Finance Act, 2002 was not justified in taking away right accrued to assessee without revoking entitlement certificate.
