The CESTAT Ahmedabad has set aside a service tax demand against Triton Communication, ruling that the company was a mediator, not a service provider.
The Gujarat High Court upheld the deletion of a ₹39 crore addition made under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, finding the assessee had discharged its onus of proof.
The Delhi High Court has set aside a GST registration cancellation due to vague show cause notices and procedural errors, reinstating the taxpayer’s registration.
Delhi HC directed GST department to pay interest on a delayed refund, citing Sections 54 and 56 of CGST Act and Bansal International precedent. Court specified applicable interest rates and periods, deducting time taken by petitioner.
The ITAT Mumbai has ruled in favor of Ankit Gems, deleting a tax addition for alleged bogus purchases. The court found no evidence and placed the burden of proof on the tax department.
ITAT Mumbai rules against a Section 263 revision order, stating the Assessing Officer had conducted sufficient inquiry in the original assessment.
The ITAT Chennai ruled on whether land was an urban capital asset and on the correct sale consideration. It held the land was a capital asset but restricted taxable sale consideration to the amount for land actually transferred in the assessment year.
The ITAT Chennai has ruled that capital gains tax cannot be levied on a minor’s share of property sale proceeds if the funds are deposited under a court order.
The ITAT Mumbai dismissed income tax appeals against Hardcastle Restaurants, holding that additions cannot be made to completed assessments without incriminating material found during a search operation.
An ITAT Delhi ruling has partially allowed appeals by the tax department, reducing significant cash deposit additions and clarifying the applicability of Section 115BBE.
