The Court dismissed the petition as the same bail condition had been previously upheld. The key takeaway is that issues already adjudicated cannot be reopened.
The case deals with rejection of a delayed tax appeal due to insufficient explanation. The Court upheld the defect but allowed another opportunity to justify the delay and pursue the appeal.
The Court upheld addition of unexplained income after finding no credible evidence of the donor’s financial capacity. It ruled that failure to establish source and genuineness of cash gifts justifies tax addition.
The ruling confirms that additions cannot be made merely on suspicion without supporting material. The Court found that the Assessing Officer did not bring any evidence to disprove the assessee’s transactions.
The High Court quashed assessment and penalty orders after finding notices were sent to an incorrect email address. It held that improper service denied the taxpayer a fair hearing, violating natural justice. The case underscores the necessity of valid notice for lawful proceedings.
The case addressed rejection of a GST refund application without following mandatory procedural requirements. The Court held the order unsustainable and directed fresh adjudication in accordance with Rule 92.
The case involved a refund claim filed years after the taxpayer became aware of excess payment. The Tribunal held that delay under Section 11B barred the claim, leading to dismissal.
The Tribunal held that limited religious spending within 5% does not bar 80G approval. The key takeaway is that incidental religious activity does not negate charitable status.
The case involved seizure of 1000 grams of suspected ganja at an airport. The Court granted bail considering it as intermediate quantity and noting custody duration and investigation stage.
The case concerned an appeal against rejection of an insolvency petition involving alleged unpaid operational dues. The tribunal found that most invoices belonged to a separate proprietorship and not the corporate debtor. It held that the statutory threshold under Section 4 of the IBC was not met, leading to dismissal.
