Madras High Court remitted the GST assessment for fresh adjudication, directing deposit of the entire disputed tax before reconsideration and fresh hearing.
Allahabad High Court held Cyber Cell cannot freeze an entire bank account and sought safeguards where an advocate’s professional fee is involved.
The High Court held that an assessment order passed without issuing a show cause notice detailing the proposed additions violated the principles of natural justice. The matter was remanded for fresh proceedings after issuing a proper notice.
The Madras High Court held that assessment proceedings should include a show cause notice identifying the proposed additions before passing the final order. The assessment orders were treated as show cause notices and remanded for fresh consideration.
NCLAT held that invoice discounting through the TReDS platform does not convert operational debt into financial debt. The appeal was dismissed as the appellant merely acquired assigned trade receivables and did not disburse funds to the corporate debtor.
ITAT Delhi held that documentary evidence established receipt of intra-group administrative support services and that the 5% markup was at arm’s length. The transfer pricing adjustment was accordingly deleted.
The Supreme Court held that a claim raised after more than twelve years suffered from delay, laches and acquiescence. It restored the appellants appointment and continuity of service while setting aside the High Court and Tribunal orders. The ruling reiterates the importance of timely assertion of service rights.
The Supreme Court held that a writ petition filed decades after the finalisation of the record of rights was barred by delay and laches. It set aside the High Court’s order and dismissed the writ petition, reaffirming that stale claims are not entitled to equitable relief.
ITAT Surat held that existing charitable institutions obtaining provisional approval for the first time should not be denied regular approval merely because their activities commenced before the amended registration regime. The matters were remanded for fresh consideration.
ITAT Hyderabad held that a penalty notice under Section 271AAB must clearly specify the applicable statutory limb and charge. As the notice was vague and defective, the penalty proceedings were held to be invalid.
