Orissa High Court held that when original re-assessment order was not passed validly, subsequent revisional order passed by PCIT is held to be invalid.
Allahabad High Court held that penalty proceedings initiated against a Government Institution for non-deduction of tax under section 8(D) of U.P. Trade Tax Act from amount payable to works contractor unsustainable as once the said contractor was assessed to tax creating tax liability on payment received from the Government Institution.
Telangana High Court in the case of suo motu cancellation of GST registration due to non-filing of GST returns, remanded the matter for fresh decision as due to non-constitution of GST tribunal, petitioner is left without any remedy.
Jharkhand High Court held that instalments paid under Income Declaration Scheme, 2016 is allowed as refund. However, interest on the same is not payable as there was no voluntary payment of tax on self-assessment.
Orissa High Court held that the suo motu revisional proceeding under section 18(1) of the Odisha Entry Tax Act, 1999 has to be concluded not beyond five years from the original order of assessment.
The petitioner had made an application in the requisite form (Form GST REG-16) praying that his registration be cancelled with effect from 31.07.2021. The reason for seeking cancellation of the registration was disclosed as ‘Discontinuance of business/Closure of business’.
Bombay High Court deferred the hearing in the matter of levy of VAT or GST on Extra Neutral Alcohol as matter already pending before Supreme Court.
Orissa High Court held that petitioner-dealer has right to cross-examine the selling dealers, however, as more than two decades elapsed it might not be practical. Accordingly, assessment would stand completed at the figures disclosed in the return of petitioner-dealer.
HC set aside cancellation order of GST Registration of assessee on the grounds that non-submission of reply to Show Cause Notice cannot be a ground for cancellation of GST Registration.
Calcutta High Court held that invocation of provisions of rule 8D(2)(ii) of the Income Tax Rules by AO without examining the accounts of the assessee and without examining the claim made by the assessee is unjustified.
