ITAT Mumbai held that disallowance of entire expenses alleging that assessee has not started its business activity till date not justified since non-generation of income after setting up of business cannot be a ground to disallow expenses.
ITAT Delhi held that benefit of section 115AAB of the Income Tax Act availed in the preceding year cannot be denied in subsequent year on the reason of non-filing of prescribed Form 10IC. Accordingly, appeal allowed.
Chhattisgarh High Court granted bail as no incriminating has been recovered at the instance of the present applicant in the matter of fake firm for availing fraudulent Input Tax Credit. Bail application allowed.
The assessee, expired on 30.10.2021. Notice dated 27.03.2023 u/s. 148A(b) of the Act was served on the address of the late assessee. The said notice was with respect to the assessment year 2019-2020.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that since the assessee, being an agriculturist was not well versed with tax proceedings, was unable to file required documents against addition on account of unexplained cash credit u/s. 69A of the Income Tax Act before AO.
Delhi High Court held that recourse to Rule 8D of Income Tax Rules for computing disallowance u/s. 14A not allowable since assessee’s computation of expense attributable to earning exempt income not found inadequate.
ITAT Mumbai held that once the source of cash is taxed, it cannot be further taxed as unexplained cash expenditure. Hence, addition under section 69C of the Income Tax Act for cash payments deleted.
ITAT Delhi held that cancellation of provisional registration u/s. 12A and 80G of the Income Tax Act as well as denial of final registration by CIT(E) without considering reply furnished by the assessee is violative of principles of natural justice.
Kerala High Court held that provisional attachment of properties purchased before commission of offence under section 5(1) of Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 [PML Act] is ex-facie null and void. Accordingly, order attaching property quashed.
NCLT Mumbai held that sale of property of personal guarantors by financial creditor under SARFAESI Act during protection of moratorium under section 96 of the IBC is invalid sale as protection of moratorium under section 96 is far greater than of section 14.
