The case examined whether one officer can perform dual roles in GST proceedings. The court held that such overlap violates natural justice and set aside the appellate order.
The issue involved restriction of TDS credit due to mismatch between Form 26AS and return. ITAT held that such adjustments require verification and cannot be made under Section 143(1).
The Supreme Court rejected the Revenue’s appeal solely on limitation, holding that the delay explanation was inadequate. The ruling highlights strict adherence to timelines in filing SLPs.
The case examined validity of a show cause notice covering several years. The court held that GST law requires year-wise assessment, making such consolidated notices invalid.
The Court held that the present case was identical to an earlier ruling and could not be distinguished. It disposed of the appeal in line with the prior judgment, ensuring consistency in decisions.
The Court held that invocation of the bank guarantee after expiry of the defect liability period was arbitrary. It ruled that absence of defects and delay invalidated the encashment action.
The Court held that the secured creditor’s rights were limited to project receivables and did not extend to management or contractual control. It ruled that the creditor could not challenge termination of the contract. The decision clarifies limits of secured creditor rights under IBC and SARFAESI.
The Court addressed whether additional remuneration taxed at the firm level can be taxed again in the hands of the partner. It directed CBDT to clarify the issue and stayed recovery proceedings. The ruling highlights concerns over potential double taxation.
The issue was whether disclosed investments could be treated as unexplained. The Tribunal held that Section 69 cannot be invoked when investments are recorded and taxed, upholding deletion of additions.
The case concerned rejection of reply without addressing all contentions. The Court held that incomplete consideration makes the order unsustainable and remanded the matter.
