The Court held that Section 197 applications cannot be rejected mechanically to “protect revenue.” Mandatory factors under Rule 28AA, including past assessments and liabilities, must be examined before directing withholding.
The High Court held that long-held, undeveloped land sold by the assessee gave rise to capital gains. Intention, holding period, and conduct outweighed Revenue assumptions.
Orissa High Court held that mere uploading of demand-cum-show cause notice in Form GST DRC-01 on GST portal under ‘Additional Notices/Orders’ resulted into non-participation. Hence, the ex-parte order passed thereon is quashed and case is remanded back.
Delhi High Court held that discrepancy in counting of notes and in some serial numbers cannot be reason for acquittal since prosecution has proved its case of recovery of counterfeit notes beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly, offence u/s. 489(C) of IPC stands proved.
Punjab and Haryana High Court held that bail in fraudulent GST Input Tax Credit allowed since trial is not likely to be completed in near future and detention in lock-up not likely to serve any purpose.
Madras High Court held that benefit of amnesty notification no. 7/2023-Central Tax dated 31.03.2023, and was amended by notification no.25/2023-Central Tax dated 17.07.2023 for late fee waiver has to be extended to all taxpayers who filed their GST Annual Returns [GSTR-9 and GSTR-9C] before issuance of above notification i.e. before 01.04.2023.
Madras High Court held that reassessment notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act for Assessment Year 2014-2015 issued on 29.07.2022 issued under new regime is held to be in time. Accordingly, writ petition stands dismissed.
The High Court upheld rejection of a limitation plea raised only at the hearing stage. It held that without supporting facts on record, such a plea cannot be entertained.
The High Court held that the “relevant period” under Rule 89(4) must be applied uniformly for ITC, turnover, and adjusted turnover. Selective interpretation for refund computation was rejected.
The High Court held that Notifications extending GST limitation were vitiated and illegal. As a result, the assessment order based on them was set aside and remanded for fresh consideration.
