The Karnataka High Court held that a complainant under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act can pursue an appeal as a victim before the Sessions Court. The matter was transferred in light of the Supreme Courts ruling in Celestium Financial.
The Tribunal held that conversion of digital photographs into printed photo products created a commercially distinct commodity, qualifying as manufacture rather than taxable photography service.
The ITAT Surat held that abnormal price rise in a penny stock and surrounding circumstances justified treating claimed LTCG as unexplained income under Section 68. The Tribunal found the transactions to be part of a pre-arranged accommodation entry scheme.
The Gujarat High Court directed the State Government to reconsider retrospective electricity duty exemption for a charitable trust engaged in hospitals and social services. The Court also restrained recovery of past electricity duty until a decision is taken.
The ITAT Mumbai held that notional rent cannot be taxed under “Income from Other Sources” without evidence that such income was actually received or receivable. The Tribunal deleted additions relating to shared premises with group companies.
The Bombay High Court held that the Appellate Authority could not reduce transitional credit by relying on MVAT mismatch figures outside the scope of Section 140 of the MGST Act. The matter was remanded for fresh consideration of the transitional credit claim.
The AAAR observed that customers were only informed about an unspecified Transporter facilitated through the e-commerce platform. It held that absence of certainty regarding the contracting party weakened the claim of an independent GTA service.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court set aside a GST demand order after holding that service through affixation without exhausting other statutory modes violated Section 169 of the CGST Act. The ruling emphasizes strict compliance with notice service requirements before raising tax demands.
The Bombay High Court quashed a GST registration cancellation order after finding that the show cause notice contained no reasons. The Court held that orders lacking reasons violate principles of natural justice and are legally unsustainable.
ITAT Mumbai held that a company engaged in publishing platforms, software solutions, and product development could not be compared with a limited-risk captive ITES service provider. Exclusion of the comparable eliminated the transfer pricing adjustment.
