The Court noted that the Revenue had not submitted any claim during the insolvency resolution process for the relevant assessment years. Following established precedent, the appeals were dismissed.
The ITAT Mumbai held that gifts of shares completed before the introduction of Section 56(2)(vii)(c) could not be taxed under that provision. The ruling clarifies that subsequent procedural formalities cannot alter the original date of transfer.
The Delhi ITAT held that unsigned reasons recorded for reopening assessment constituted a jurisdictional defect that invalidated the reassessment proceedings. The defect was not curable under Section 292B of the Act.
The Court set aside a GST demand order after finding that the personal hearing was scheduled before the last date for filing a reply. The ruling underscores that statutory hearing requirements cannot be reduced to a procedural formality.
Saurabh Kumar Gupta Vs Union of India (Allahabad High Court) The Allahabad High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the order dated 30.12.2025 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, Division-I, Lucknow, whereby a penalty of ₹38,12,904 was imposed upon the petitioner under Section 122(1)(A) of the CGST Act, 2017. The case arose […]
Madras High Court condoned delay in filing an income tax return by a co-operative society, holding that small farmer-members should not suffer due to administrative lapses.
The Court stayed coercive recovery proceedings after noting allegations that adverse findings were based on witness statements without permitting cross-examination. The ruling emphasizes the importance of natural justice in adjudication proceedings.
The Court restrained coercive recovery proceedings after noting allegations that the adjudication order relied heavily on witness statements without permitting cross-examination. The ruling highlights the significance of procedural fairness in adjudication proceedings.
The Court held that a taxpayer who does not respond to a show cause notice cannot later invoke writ jurisdiction alleging procedural violations. The petitioner was directed to pursue the statutory appellate remedy.
Tribunal ruled that interest liability extends to the full duty adjudged under Section 28, regardless of whether payment is made through cash or EPCG licence adjustment. The decision clarifies the scope of compensatory interest provisions.
