Tribunal ruled that reimbursable expenses such as freight, warehousing, and terminal handling charges were not liable to service tax. Decision followed Supreme Court judgment declaring Rule 5(1) beyond scope of Sections 66 and 67 of Finance Act.
Patna HC refused to interfere with GST proceedings after taxpayer’s representative admitted liability towards interest and penalty during personal hearing. Court held that petitioner could not later take a contradictory stand in writ proceedings.
Supreme Court dismissed the challenge against reopening of assessment where the Gujarat High Court had upheld reassessment proceedings based on Investigation Wing material alleging accommodation entries. The case reaffirmed that prima facie material is sufficient at the reopening stage.
Gujarat HC held that reassessment under Sections 147 and 148 was valid where Assessing Officer received fresh investigation material alleging accommodation entries. Court observed that prima facie tangible material is sufficient at reopening stage.
Bombay High Court upheld deletion of disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) where there was only short deduction of TDS and the recipients had already paid taxes. The Court also reiterated that the second proviso to Section 40(a)(ia) operates retrospectively from 01.04.2005.
ITAT Mumbai held that stamp duty valuation on the date of allotment should be considered where property consideration was fixed earlier and payments were made through banking channels before registration.
The Karnataka High Court held that blocking of Electronic Credit Ledger under Rule 86A without granting a prior hearing violated principles of natural justice and caused serious civil consequences.
ITAT Raipur held that reassessment proceedings were invalid where documents and information forming the basis of reopening under Section 148 were withheld from the assessee.
The Tribunal ruled that recording satisfaction under Section 153C is not a mechanical exercise and must clearly establish the relevance of seized material to the assessee’s income.
The Bombay High Court held that rejection of a manual GST appeal was unsustainable where DRC-07 was not available on the GST portal. The matter was remanded for reconsideration under the proviso to Rule 108 of the CGST Rules.
