The High Court held that ITC cannot be denied solely due to delay in claiming it after retrospective amendments to GST law. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication on other conditions.
The Tribunal held that the TPO failed to consider the assessee’s Internal CUP benchmarking despite directions from the DRP. It directed fresh examination using the correct method and excluded certain NCDs from adjustment.
The issue was whether exemption under Section 54 could be restricted to one property. ITAT held that prior to the 2015 amendment, multiple residential properties were eligible, and full deduction must be allowed.
The ITAT held that a 29-day delay in filing Form 10B is a procedural lapse and cannot be the sole basis for denying exemption under Sections 11 and 12. It ruled that substantial compliance and availability of the audit report before processing must be considered. The AO was directed to reassess the exemption claim accordingly.
The High Court held that interest under Section 234B must be waived where conflicting judicial decisions created uncertainty regarding tax exemption. The rejection of the waiver application was set aside.
The Court held that cancellation for non-filing of returns can be reconsidered if the taxpayer files pending returns and clears dues, directing authorities to consider restoration.
The court held that jurisdiction existed when the order was passed post-circular. It upheld penalties for fraudulent ITC and fake invoices, rejecting the jurisdiction challenge.
The Court quashed the order passed without response, allowing reconsideration after deposit and hearing. It emphasized the need for fair opportunity before adjudication.
The Court held that refund rejection on limitation grounds was invalid as authorities failed to consider the Supreme Court’s COVID-related exclusion period. It directed fresh adjudication with hearing.
REC Limited Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Delhi, adjudicated cross appeals filed by the assessee and the Revenue for Assessment Years (AYs) 2018–19 and 2019–20, along with Revenue appeals for AYs 2020–21 and 2021–22. Since the issues were common across years, the Tribunal disposed of all appeals through a consolidated […]
