The Court examined whether repeated summons to a director amounted to misuse of power. It held that while authorities can summon individuals, such power must not be exercised arbitrarily or for harassment.
The case examined whether the accused could disprove liability under Section 138. The court upheld conviction as the presumption remained unrebutted and evidence supported the complainant’s claim.
Delhi High Court held that it would be unreasonable to deny Export Promotion Capital Goods [EPCG] benefit merely because of non-submission of Bills of Export [BOE] as proof of discharge of export obligation since there was collateral evidence of discharge of export obligation.
Bombay High Court held that managerial and technical services provided from China to India through virtual means constitutes service rendered in India. Accordingly, rejection of application seeking NIL withholding tax based on pending assessments before ITAT justifiable.
The case examined whether sanction by JCIT was valid for reassessment beyond four years. The court held that such approval was invalid, making the notices unsustainable.
The court held that failure to grant a personal hearing violated statutory provisions and natural justice, invalidating the proceedings. It ruled that such defects cannot be cured at the appellate stage.
The court held that parties cannot introduce additional evidence as a matter of right under Rule 29. The ITAT’s acceptance of Revenue-filed evidence and remand order was set aside as beyond jurisdiction.
The issue involved rejection of an appeal against GST cancellation on limitation grounds. The Court granted relief by following consistent precedents, allowing restoration subject to compliance conditions.
The court held that revision under section 263 requires independent satisfaction by the PCIT. Acting merely on the Assessing Officer’s view renders the revision order invalid.
The case addressed whether a special audit can be ordered without establishing complexity or defects in accounts. The Court examined whether mechanical invocation of Section 142(2A) without proper justification is legally sustainable.
