ITAT Chandigarh ruled that general expenses could not be disallowed merely on suspicion or comparative increase without identifying defects in books or non-business expenditure. The Tribunal observed that the AO made the addition without proper examination of records.
CESTAT Kolkata held that Customs authorities cannot enhance declared transaction value without first following the mandatory two-step verification process under Rule 12 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007. The Tribunal ruled that the Department failed to establish valid grounds for rejecting the declared value.
CESTAT Bangalore held that the Government department was aware of service tax liability because service tax had been specifically included in the project price bids. The Tribunal treated the project as an EPC contract falling under Works Contract Services.
ITAT Kolkata set aside the appellate order after observing inconsistencies between the findings of the CIT(A) and the assessment order. The Tribunal directed fresh adjudication with a reasoned speaking order and proper opportunity of hearing.
SREI Equipment Finance Limited Vs SRK Infracon (India) Private Ltd (NCLT Hyderabad) The National Company Law Tribunal admitted an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against a corporate debtor after finding clear existence of financial debt, continuing default, and a valid claim […]
The Gujarat AAR ruled that pizzas, pasta, salads, shakes, and similar items prepared or blended at bakery outlets upon customer order constitute restaurant services under GST. The ruling applies even where the food is sold through takeaway counters.
GSTAT noted inconsistencies in the DGAP’s findings regarding whether the Respondent had actually increased base prices after GST rate reduction. The Tribunal held that such contradictions required comprehensive reinvestigation.
The Tribunal noted that the Applicant repeatedly failed to appear or file objections despite multiple opportunities being granted. In absence of any rebuttal, GSTAT proceeded on the basis of the DGAP report and available records.
CESTAT Ahmedabad ruled that before the 2016 amendment, there was no prohibition under the Cenvat Credit Rules against using basic excise duty credit for payment of NCCD. The Tribunal dismissed Revenue’s demand for recovery of ₹4.53 crore.
DCIT Vs Shikha Indrakumar Agrawal (ITAT Nagpur) The Nagpur Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dismissed the Revenue’s appeal and upheld deletion of additions made under Sections 68 and 69C in respect of long-term capital gains claimed as exempt under Section 10(38) on sale of listed shares. The assessee had purchased 24,000 shares of […]
