The Delhi High Court ruled that deposits arising from cash sales did not render genuine import purchases unexplained. The Court emphasized that the transactions were supported by customs and banking documents.
The Gujarat High Court set aside a Section 148 notice after finding no direct or indirect connection between the assessee and the seized third-party documents. The Court held that reassessment based on vague material and assumptions was unsustainable.
The Supreme Court upheld the finding that rejection of books and addition for suppressed production were invalid where the Assessing Officer relied only on estimated yield comparisons. The ruling reiterates that tax assessments require tangible supporting material.
The Chhattisgarh High Court upheld deletion of ₹15.94 crore addition after finding no adverse material supporting allegations of suppressed production and unaccounted sales. The Court reaffirmed that assessments cannot be based on mere assumptions or estimated yield comparisons.
The NCLT Mumbai approved a resolution plan after holding that EPFO claims based on provisional and pro-rata calculations without adjudication under Sections 7A, 7Q, and 14B could not be admitted in CIRP. The ruling clarified that only crystallized statutory liabilities determined through due process are admissible.
Delhi ITAT held that revision under Section 263 was invalid because the Assessing Officer had already made additions on the exact issue for which reassessment was reopened. The Tribunal ruled that the reassessment order was not erroneous or prejudicial to Revenue.
The Tribunal held that documents relating to payments made to suppliers such as TS MARKFED and Sri Venkateshwara Agencies required proper verification. The case was remanded to the AO for fresh adjudication.
The Mumbai CESTAT set aside a service tax demand after finding that the Show Cause Notice failed to identify the relevant sub-clause under Business Auxiliary Services. The Tribunal held that such vagueness violated principles of natural justice and invalidated the entire proceeding.
The Supreme Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition challenging pay stepping-up relief granted to senior employees. The ruling left intact the Rajasthan High Court and CAT orders directing removal of salary anomalies between seniors and juniors.
The Rajasthan High Court upheld CAT Jaipur’s order granting stepping up of pay to senior employees after noting that similar issues had already been decided by the Karnataka and Delhi High Courts. The court found no reason to interfere with the Tribunal’s directions.
