ITAT Delhi held that interest awarded under Section 28 is an accretion to compensation and cannot be taxed as income from other sources. The appeal was allowed following Supreme Court precedent.
NCLAT held that invoices with default dates beyond the Section 10A period cannot be barred under the COVID suspension provision. The ₹2.36 crore claim was restored for fresh consideration.
Tribunal held that rejection of the Project Completion Method was invalid as the Assessing Officer did not record satisfaction under section 145(3). Income was directed to be recomputed under the method consistently followed by the assessee.
Tribunal held that application software licences with limited duration and no ownership rights are revenue expenditure. It deleted the disallowance and ruled that remand by the Commissioner (Appeals) was unjustified.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that an unsigned Excel sheet found during survey, without corroborative evidence, cannot justify addition for alleged cash payments.
The Madras High Court quashed GST assessment orders passed under Section 74 after finding that no personal hearing was granted. The Court held that denying a hearing violates principles of natural justice and remanded the matter for fresh consideration.
Madras High Court quashed assessment under Section 74 as no personal hearing was granted and the same assessment year was reassessed for higher demand.
The Tribunal held that notices issued on or after 01.04.2021 for A.Y. 2015-16 were invalid in view of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Rajeev Bansal. As the reopening was barred by limitation, the reassessment order was quashed.
The Court refused to interfere with the reassessment order, noting that sufficient opportunity was provided pursuant to a remand. Financial crisis was held not to be a valid ground to set aside the assessment.
The Calcutta High Court held that passing an adverse order without granting mandatory hearing under Section 75(4) violates natural justice. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication.
