Nannapaneni Krishnamurthy Vs State of Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Pradesh High Court) The petition was filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of the investigation and proceedings against the petitioners, who are accused Nos. 12 and 13 in Crime No. 8 of 2021 registered at the CID Police Station, Amaravathi, Mangalagiri. The case involves […]
The Tribunal found that the creditor’s reliance on invoice-based interest was insufficient because the invoices lacked the debtor’s consent. Consequently, the principal amount alone was considered, which did not meet the statutory threshold. The case underscores the requirement that interest must be contractually established to count toward default.
The Tribunal noted that the Assessing Officers communication did not consider the assessees objections but only reiterated the basis of reopening. As the objections were not disposed of through a separate speaking order, the reassessment lacked jurisdiction. The ruling underscores that non-compliance with GKN Driveshafts cannot be treated as a mere procedural lapse.
The Court set aside notices issued manually by the JAO, holding that reassessment and issuance of Section 148 notices must follow the mandatory faceless mechanism under Section 151A. The ruling reinforces that the JAO has no concurrent jurisdiction.
Aseem Sehgal Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) The appeals concern assessment years 2015–16 to 2017–18 and arise from reassessment orders issued under Sections 147 and 144B of the Income-tax Act. The sole issue examined by the Tribunal is whether the Assessing Officer was justified in framing reassessment under the pre-April 2021 provisions despite issuing the notice […]
SC ordered Department to comply with High Court directions and issue C-Forms and F-Forms after verification of indemnity bonds, leaving legal questions open for future cases.
The High Court set aside a GST appellate order after finding that it lacked reasoning and failed to address the taxpayer’s ITC claim made in GSTR-9. The matter was remanded for fresh consideration.
Delhi High Court ruled that both JAO and FAO have concurrent jurisdiction to issue reassessment notices under Sections 148/148A, aligning with TKS Builders precedent.
The Telangana High Court ruled that Section 148 notices for central charge cases must follow the faceless procedure under the Finance Act, 2021, quashing JAO-issued notices.
Delhi High Court dismisses Revenue appeal, upholding CESTAT’s finding that production capacity claims and alleged clandestine SS flats removal by the company were unsubstantiated.
