The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)’s deletion of Rs. 11.26 crore LTCG, noting the unregistered JDA could not constitute a transfer under Section 2(47)(v). Taxability arises only upon registration and statutory approvals.
Delhi High Court uncovered fraudulent Input Tax Credit claims after a trader sought GST registration cancellation and imposed ₹5 lakh costs for misleading submissions.
The Court held that amounts paid under protest before assessment must be considered when calculating the 10% pre-deposit required under Section 26(6A) of the MVAT Act. The ruling restores the appeal and confirms that the statute must be interpreted strictly as written.
The Tribunal held that Section 87A contains no exclusion for long-term capital gains and allowed the rebate since total income remained below Rs.5 lakhs. The order of the lower authorities was set aside.
The Bombay High Court ruled that the CIT cannot exercise revision powers under Section 263 when the Assessing Officer has verified the identity, source, and creditworthiness of foreign donors and satisfied with gifts received.
The J&K High Court directed restoration of GST registration for a petitioner who undertook to deposit taxes, penalties, and interest, after prior cancellation for non-response to a show-cause notice.
The J&K High Court directed restoration of GST registration for a petitioner who undertook to deposit taxes, penalties, and interest, after prior cancellation for non-response to a show-cause notice.
The court reaffirmed that reassessment notices under Section 148 must be issued via the CBDT-prescribed automated system. Notices issued by local officers without allocation are considered without jurisdiction.
The Gujarat High Court restrained the Assessing Officer from passing a final order under Section 148, citing non-compliance with the preliminary verification requirements under the Scheme framed under Section 135A.
Punjab and Haryana High Court held that a Section 148 notice issued by a Jurisdictional Assessing Officer after the faceless assessment scheme is invalid. The notice contravened Section 151A and the 2022 e-Assessment scheme. The court quashed the notice with directions to follow statutory faceless procedure.
