The Madras High Court held that tax claims not included in a Resolution Plan approved under the IBC cannot be pursued, confirming all pre-approval dues stand extinguished.
The Court held that GST recovery exceeding 10% made earlier must be treated as statutory pre-deposit. The appellate authority must hear the appeal on merits without insisting on further payment.
The Tribunal held that allegations of mis-declaration and under-valuation were unsupported by evidence. The redemption fine and penalty were set aside as the valuation acceptance was attributed to clearance delays.
The Court held that multiple refund applications filed within time were wrongly rejected as time-barred. It ruled that COVID-19 limitation exclusion and earlier timely filings must be considered, directing reconsideration with interest.
The court held that refund of Compensation Cess ITC is permissible on exports made with IGST payment because statutory provisions prevail over conflicting circulars. The ruling clarifies that unutilized Cess credit on inputs used for exports must be refunded.
Tribunal held that income cannot be added merely because it appears in Form 26AS and remanded matter to verify whether assessee actually received amounts corresponding to TDS credits.
Supreme Court refused to interfere with the High Court ruling that treated settlement applications filed before 31.03.2021 as valid, while keeping the legal question open
The court ruled that settlement applications filed between 01.02.2021 and 31.03.2021 remain valid since the Finance Act, 2021 took effect only on 01.04.2021, preserving vested rights during the interregnum
Orders issued under Sections 147A(d) and 148 were quashed as arbitrary, and the delayed SLP challenging them was dismissed, finalizing the invalidation of reassessment proceedings.
The Bombay High Court held the reassessment and associated notices illegal and arbitrary, setting aside orders under Sections 147A(d) and 148.
