The High Court set aside a tax demand issued under Section 156 because it was not based on any assessment or reassessment order. The ruling held that a demand notice cannot exist without a prior order determining tax liability.
The ITAT Delhi set aside the rejection of 12A registration, holding that the applicant should be given another opportunity to submit documents proving the genuineness of charitable activities.
The ITAT Mumbai held that when stamp duty value is disputed, the Assessing Officer should refer the property to the Departmental Valuation Officer. The matter was remanded for fresh assessment.
The Tribunal held that once a resolution plan is approved under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, appeals relating to claims not included in the plan cannot continue.
The High Court noted that large penalties were imposed on corporate entities while the individual accused faced only a limited penalty, making the restriction on travel unjustified.
The Tribunal held that the sale of shares after holding them for nearly ten years could not be treated as a bogus penny stock transaction due to lack of evidence of manipulation.
The ITAT Ranchi held that Section 56(2)(x) cannot apply where the property purchase agreement was executed before the provision existed, even if the sale deed was registered later.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court ordered refund of IGST paid on ocean freight, holding that the levy under Notification No.10/2017 was invalid following the Supreme Court’s ruling in Mohit Minerals.
The Tribunal held that reimbursements received from overseas manufacturers for warranty repairs were merely cost recoveries and could not be treated as taxable service consideration.
The Supreme Court granted anticipatory bail while directing the accused to cooperate with investigation, surrender passport and avoid influencing witnesses. The Court held that bail would stand cancelled if the conditions are violated.
