Delhi High Court set aside the detention of a passenger’s gold, holding it invalid as no Show Cause Notice or personal hearing was provided under Section 124 of the Customs Act.
Madras High Court quashes assessment against SMILE Microfinance Ltd. for violation of natural justice and directs reassessment with personal hearing within 12 weeks.
The Punjab & Haryana High Court held that tax officers cannot block a taxpayer’s electronic credit ledger under Rule 86-A beyond the ITC actually available.
ITAT Mumbai upheld relief granted by CIT(A) to Aishwarya Rai Bachchan, holding that the AO failed to record satisfaction before rejecting the assessee’s suo-moto disallowance under Section 14A. The Tribunal found the additional disallowance of ₹4.11 crore excessive and unsupported by evidence.
The Delhi High Court held that a deficiency memo under Rule 90 of the CGST Rules must be issued within 15 days of filing a refund application. Delay beyond this period entitles taxpayers to interest on the refund.
The Madras High Court stayed recovery for 90 days, allowing Faiz Wahab time to file a stay application after the sale advance refund was taxed as unexplained income.
The Tribunal ruled that refund limitation under Section 27 does not apply to bank guarantees encashed during pending appeals and ordered customs to refund the encashed amount.
The ITAT Mumbai dismissed the Revenue’s appeal, holding that penalty cannot be imposed where the assessee’s claim is based on a genuine interpretation of Section 44 and Rule 5 and involves a debatable issue.
The Tribunal directed estimation of income at 8% under Section 44AD after disallowing expenses due to lack of evidence in Friends Transport Carrier vs ITO.
In a case concerning Uzbekistan Airways, the Delhi High Court granted time to file an appeal against a GST demand of ₹35.39 lakh. The Court held that the appeal, once filed within time, must be heard on merits.
