ITAT Ahmedabad held that if an assessee has failed/omitted to make a claim at the time of filing of return of income the same can be claimed during the course of appellate proceedings. Accordingly, claim placed before appellate authorities allowed.
Madras High Court held that notice for mismatch of the input tax between GSTR 3B with that of GSTR-2A is not received by the petitioner hence order set aside and matter remanded back for fresh consideration.
Madras High Court held that issuance of multiple notices for same year lead to confusion because of which petitioner failed to furnish the reply. Accordingly, order set aside with direction to grant proper opportunity of being heard.
Delhi High Court held that issuance of Show Cause Notice under Section 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 to the deceased taxpayer is invalid and hence liable to be set aside.
ITAT Bangalore held that dismissal of appeal by First Appellate Authority [CIT(A)] due to non-payment of advance tax unjustified as assessee was not required to pay advance tax. Hence, matter remanded back for fresh consideration.
Patna High Court held that assigning reasons or grounds is mandatory while preparing seizure memo. Action based on local trader’s opinion is not reliable and acceptable. Accordingly, seizure memo is liable to be set aside.
Present application has been filed on behalf of Taxation Bar Association seeking modification of Para 35(11.17)(iv) of the judgment dated 19th March, 2024 insofar as it requires twelve appearances in a year to be eligible to vote in elections.
Gauhati High Court held that the Summary of the Show Cause Notice along with the attachment containing the determination of tax cannot be said to be a valid initiation of proceedings under Section 73 without issuance of a proper Show Cause Notice.
Bombay High Court remanded the matter of correct treatment of losses arising due to exchange rate fluctuation since order doesn’t deal with import of Section 43A of the Income Tax Act and its interplay with section 37(1).
ITAT Chandigarh held that since notices were issued through ITBA portal only it cannot be treated as a valid service of notice. Accordingly, proceedings initiated under section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act is liable to be quashed.
