The Tribunal held that the assessee established a prima facie case regarding deduction eligibility for habitable-unit expenditure.
he Court held that the penalty for an unfilled Part-B of the e-way bill could not stand as the authority recorded no attempt to evade tax. The ruling reinforces that Section 129 requires a specific finding of evasion.
The Tribunal reinstated the entire disallowance after finding the purchases completely non-genuine. It held that estimation theory cannot apply where transactions are proven to be sham.
Court held that penalty under Section 48(5) cannot rest on presumption and requires verification of account books, which authorities failed to conduct. All orders were set aside.
The Supreme Court held that a writ petition cannot bypass statutory appeal remedies under the Customs Act. Delay in filing the statutory appeal barred the petitioner from seeking relief under Article 226.
Allahabad High Court rejected writ petition challenging a Rs. 17.7 crore penalty, directing broker to pursue statutory appeal under Customs Act for proper adjudication.
The High Court permitted shifting of goods from SEZ to a bonded warehouse while pending show-cause adjudication, subject to filing YBE, verification, and re-warehousing certificate within 45 days.
The Court held that interest and penalty cannot be imposed when not proposed in the show cause notice, setting aside the assessment and attachment orders.
Allahabad High Court quashes GST adjudication and appellate orders where personal hearing coincided with the notice submission date, mandating fresh hearing for procedural fairness.
Tribunal dismisses AO’s addition after assessing evidence, books of accounts, VAT returns, and confirmed ledgers, confirming the transactions’ authenticity.
