The Gujarat High Court held that Customs could not introduce new allegations and evidence through a corrigendum after the adjudication hearing had concluded. It directed the authority to decide the original show cause notice without considering the corrigendum.
Karnataka High Court set aside Order-in-Original after petitioner alleged that it was passed without service of notice or an opportunity of hearing. Matter was remanded for fresh consideration.
After ruling that the extended limitation period was invalidly invoked, CESTAT held that it was unnecessary to consider the substantive service tax and CENVAT credit issues. The appeals were allowed on limitation alone.
The ITAT Chandigarh held that no TDS was deductible where professional fees paid to each payee were below the statutory threshold. It also deleted the branch stock addition after finding that the unsold stock represented an amount recoverable from the branch and not taxable income.
The Tribunal held that AMP expenditure incurred in India without any agreement or arrangement with the foreign AE cannot be treated as an international transaction. It also directed the AO to allow set-off of brought-forward business losses and unabsorbed depreciation in accordance with law.
The ITAT held that registration under Section 12AB could not be rejected without identifying a specific “specified violation” under the statutory framework. It remanded the matter for fresh examination after finding the order lacked clear and reasoned findings.
ITAT Mumbai held that the CPC could not withdraw an already allowed Section 10AA deduction through rectification without recording reasons. The Tribunal restored the deduction after finding no material justifying the action.
The Calcutta High Court held that the PCIT was not authorised to condone the delay in filing Form 10-IC for AY 2024-25 as the applicable CBDT circular covered only earlier assessment years. The Court quashed the order and directed the petitioner to approach the CBDT.
The Kerala High Court held that Section 144B does not require issuance of a draft assessment order to an ordinary assessee. It ruled that the requirement applies only to an eligible assessee as defined under the Income Tax Act.
The NCLT held that a DRT Recovery Certificate provides a fresh cause of action, making the Section 7 application filed within three years maintainable. It admitted the CIRP after finding that financial debt and default were established.
