The Gujarat AAR held that black mineral water containing added minerals but no sugar, sweeteners, or flavouring is classifiable under HSN 22011010. The ruling confirms applicability of 5% GST under Entry 146 of Notification No. 09/2025.
Gujarat AAR held that input tax credit on goods and services used for constructing a CCV Tower was admissible as the structure formed an essential structural support for manufacturing machinery. The ruling clarified that such support systems are covered within “plant and machinery” under Section 17(5) of the CGST Act.
The ITAT Amritsar reduced additions on unexplained cash deposits after considering that the assessee and his wife were senior citizens with no regular income source. The Tribunal allowed part of the deposits as past savings and household cash availability.
The ITAT Amritsar remanded a case involving denial of section 54B exemption where the assessee relied on Girdawari records to prove agricultural use of land. The Tribunal directed fresh verification of land records after finding disputes regarding cultivation entries in revenue documents.
GSTAT upheld anti-profiteering findings after the developer accepted the DGAP report concerning ITC benefits in a housing project. The Tribunal ruled that excess benefit given to some buyers cannot offset shortfall payable to others.
The Andhra Pradesh High Court held that an Insurance Company cannot avoid liability without producing evidence showing absence of a valid driving licence. The Court also upheld compensation based on gross salary and enhanced amounts under conventional heads.
The Bombay High Court held that reassessment proceedings became time-barred because no reassessment order was passed within the limitation period prescribed under Section 153. The Court ruled that procedural remand directions did not extend limitation under Section 153(6).
CESTAT Bangalore upheld penalty under Section 112(b) after finding that the Customs Broker knowingly arranged transportation of duty-free imported goods to locations not permitted under advance licences. The Tribunal held that such conduct amounted to aiding violation of customs conditions.
ITAT Mumbai held that denial of cross-examination in a case based on third-party statements and seized records violated principles of natural justice. The matter was remanded for fresh assessment after granting the assessee an opportunity to cross-examine witnesses.
The ITAT Delhi held that an assessee cannot be taxed on excess income wrongly declared in the return due to inadvertent error. The Tribunal deleted the Section 69A addition after accepting agricultural income evidence.
