The Bombay High Court held that communication of an ITAT order to a Chartered Accountant does not constitute service on the assessee, condoning a 40-day delay in filing appeal.
Allahabad High Court held that GST registration cannot be cancelled without issuing a mandatory notice in Form REG-17, even in cases of voluntary surrender, setting aside cancellation and appeal orders.
CESTAT Allahabad set aside a penalty imposed on a customs officer, holding that statements recorded under duress and without corroboration cannot be relied upon for conviction.
The tribunal closed the anti-profiteering case as the supplier could not be located, preventing the DGAP from verifying whether GST benefits were passed on. The ruling emphasizes the need for traceable business records.
Recognizing common difficulties in accessing notices on the GST portal, the High Court directed a fresh adjudication and emphasized taxpayer trust and procedural fairness in the GST regime.
The Gujarat High Court set aside an assessment order passed without considering the taxpayer’s reply regarding TDS under Section 194Q. The Court held that the faceless unit generated the order before reviewing the submission, violating natural justice. The case was remanded for a fresh decision after due consideration of the reply.
Tribunal held that deduction under Section 54 depends on amount actually invested in a new property and not on ownership proportion. Assessing Officer’s restriction to 50% due to joint ownership was set aside, confirming relief for assessee.
ITAT Chennai ruled that an assessment order issued without a Document Identification Number violates CBDT Circular No. 19/2019 and is invalid. Tribunal held that non-compliance with circular’s mandate cannot be cured by later communication of DIN. Orders lacking DIN are deemed never to have been issued.
The Telangana High Court ruled that an assessment order passed ten years after an ITAT remand violated Section 153 of the Income Tax Act. It held that the order was barred by limitation and unsustainable in law. The Court directed refund of taxes with interest, subject to the outcome of the pending departmental appeal.
The Tribunal ruled that grants from the Maharashtra Government for road projects were capital in nature. Such promoter’s contributions cannot be taxed as business income.
