Delhi ITAT Restricts Corporate Guarantee Fee to 0.30% After Finding Actual Interest Saving Was Only 0.60%; Holds TP Adjustment Must Reflect Real Benefit From Corporate Guarantee.
ITAT Mumbai upheld deletion of consultancy expenditure disallowance after finding that the Assessing Officer failed to produce cogent evidence showing that services were not rendered. The Tribunal held that suspicion and third-party allegations alone could not justify the addition.
ITAT Chandigarh deleted an addition made under Section 69 after finding that the Assessing Officer relied only on an Excel sheet entry without corroborative evidence. The Tribunal held that suspicion alone cannot justify an addition.
The Allahabad High Court held that no pattern of unequal marking by different interview boards was established in the UPHJS 2016 recruitment process and dismissed the plea for moderation of marks.
The Supreme Court held that written statements filed after expiry of the mandatory 120-day period under the amended CPC cannot be taken on record in commercial suits. The ruling emphasizes strict compliance with timelines introduced by the Commercial Courts Act.
The Allahabad High Court invalidated proceedings under Section 129 of the CGST Act after finding that only a chassis was being moved for refurbishment and no goods were loaded in the vehicle.
The Gujarat High Court set aside GST detention proceedings after finding that the final order was passed beyond the mandatory seven-day period prescribed under Section 129(3) of the CGST Act. The ruling reiterates that statutory timelines in detention cases must be strictly followed.
The Delhi High Court held that reassessment proceedings for AY 2013-14 were valid since the limitation period stood extended till 30 June 2021 under TOLA.
The Calcutta High Court set aside the order passed under Section 148A(d) after holding that failure to grant a personal hearing amounted to violation of principles of natural justice.
Delhi High Court held that disputes relating to GST refund rejection and appreciation of evidence should be pursued through the statutory appellate remedy under Section 112 of the CGST Act. The Court declined writ interference as GSTAT was functional and operational.
