Delhi High Court held that IT/ITeS would fall within the definition of ‘Industrial Building’ as envisaged under Bye-law 9(e) of DMC Property Tax bye-law 2004 and therefore, demand of property tax rightly set aside.
Madras High Court held that block assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 158BC of the Income Tax Act has been passed within the period prescribed u/s. 158BE(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act and hence not barred by limitation.
Calcutta High Court held that reopening of assessment u/s. 147 for claim of bogus capital gain sustained fundamentals of company are very weak and abnormal price rise in share is artificially manipulated.
The present petition is filed assailing the Communication dated 03 February 2014 issued by the Respondent No. 3 rejecting the Petitioner’s Application dated 15 December 2011 for seeking amendments of the earlier granted approval dated 17.11.2006.
Karnataka High Court held that blocking of Electronic Credit Ledger by invoking Rule 86A of the CGST Rules, 2017 without granting pre-decisional hearing and without providing independent or cogent reason in the order is not justifiable.
Andhra Pradesh High Court rules Show Cause Notices lacking a Document Identification Number (DIN) are invalid, citing CBIC circulars and Supreme Court precedents.
Gujarat High Court held that order cancelling GST registration for non-filing of GST return set aside since tax along with interest and penalty already paid and petitioner is ready and willing to abide by the provisions of GST Act and Rules.
Gujarat High Court held that Revisional authority ought to have taken into consideration that AO has to pass best judgement assessment order without granting an opportunity of being heard. Thus, matter remanded back to AO for de novo consideration.
Himachal Pradesh High Court held that pending tax in respect of vehicles purchased in auction is to be paid by the auction purchaser. Also held that there is no equity in taxation law and law would prevail in case of conflict between law and equity.
Calcutta High Court upholds quashing of an assessment order due to the Assessing Officer’s inherent lack of jurisdiction, citing CBDT instructions on nil income cases.
