The Andhra Pradesh High Court held that depositing money into the electronic cash ledger does not discharge GST liability. Tax is treated as paid only when the amount is debited and appropriated to the Government account, making interest payable for the delay.
The Court held that allegations of organized tax evasion are covered by the exception in CBDT Circular No. 5/2024 and therefore cannot be dismissed solely on the ground of low tax effect.
The Delhi High Court held that expenditure on gifts, boarding, and lodging incurred for a General Body Meeting was allowable under Section 37. The Court ruled that expenses incurred to fulfill statutory obligations constitute business expenditure.
The High Court accepted a mediation settlement resolving long-pending land acquisition disputes involving compensation, interest, and pending proceedings. The settlement was treated as a final and binding resolution between the parties.
The Jaipur ITAT held that reopening under Section 147 cannot be sustained where the Assessing Officer merely relies on information from the Investigation Wing without forming an independent belief. The reassessment proceedings were held invalid for lack of independent application of mind.
The Jaipur ITAT held that reopening of assessment cannot be based solely on information received from the Investigation Wing without independent application of mind. The reassessment proceedings were quashed as the Assessing Officer failed to form his own satisfaction.
The Lucknow ITAT held that reassessment proceedings cannot survive where the reasons recorded contain incorrect facts and lack proper application of mind. The reassessment order was quashed as the recorded reasons were found arbitrary and unsustainable.
The Nagpur ITAT restored the matter to the CIT(A) after noting that the legal issue regarding notices issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer is pending before the Supreme Court. A fresh adjudication on merits was directed.
The Bombay High Court held that Section 65 audit proceedings can be initiated even after GST registration is cancelled if the audit pertains to a period when the taxpayer was registered. Cancellation of registration does not extinguish statutory obligations relating to past tax periods.
Mumbai ITAT held that a reassessment notice issued beyond three years was invalid because approval was obtained from the Principal CIT instead of the prescribed higher authority under Section 151. The reassessment proceedings and assessment order were quashed.
