NCLAT held that the appellant failed to prove the alleged deposit was made to the respondent company, as the records showed the money was credited to the Kerala Trade Centre. The appeal was dismissed with liberty to pursue remedies against the appropriate entity.
Tribunal ruled that questions relating to loans and advances are matters for assessment proceedings and not sufficient grounds to reject renewal of registration. The CIT(E) was directed to reconsider the application.
NCLT Mumbai compounded the offence for failure to hold the AGM within the time prescribed under Section 96 of the Companies Act, 2013. The Tribunal directed payment of a compounding fee after finding a continuing statutory default.
The ITAT held that reassessment notices issued after the surviving limitation period prescribed by the Supreme Court were invalid. Consequently, the reassessment proceedings and assessment orders were quashed for lack of jurisdiction.
The Rajasthan High Court directed taxpayers to pursue the statutory appellate remedy under Section 107 of the CGST Act. Appeals filed within 30 days must be decided on merits without examining limitation.
The Calcutta High Court held that prepayment charges, commitment charges and processing fees formed part of the recoverable debt under the lending arrangement. The bank was therefore entitled to retain the pledged FDR until all contractual liabilities were discharged.
ITAT Chennai held that revision under Section 263 could not survive on the issue of prior period expenditure after the Assessing Officer verified and accepted the claim in the consequential assessment. The revision was sustained only on the remaining issues.
ITAT held that Accounting Standard-19 governs accounting treatment but does not determine tax treatment under the Income-tax Act. It ruled that depreciation belongs to the legal owner while lease rentals remain deductible for the lessee.
The Madras High Court upheld the blocking of ITC under Rule 86A after finding that the Revenue had recorded adequate material supporting its reasons to believe the transactions were fraudulent. The Court also directed the Department to complete the consequential proceedings expeditiously.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that sugar exported out of India was exempt from the whole of the sugar cess under the 1993 exemption notification. Since the exports were undisputed, the Tribunal set aside the demand, interest, and penalty.
