The petitioner’s claim that delay was caused by a tax consultant was rejected. The Court held that the Tribunal’s finding was not perverse and required no interference.
CIT Vs Patel Engg. Ltd. (Bombay High Court) The appeals before the Bombay High Court arose from orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) allowing deduction under Section 80-IA(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to the assessee for Assessment Years 2000–01 and 2001–02. The central issue was whether the assessee qualified as a […]
The issue involved cancellation of GST registration without proof of proper service of notice. The Court held the order invalid and remanded the matter for fresh consideration.
The court held that issuing multiple demand notices for a single adjudication order is improper. It directed issuance of a composite notice to enable a single appeal.
The court held that reassessment cannot be initiated on issues already examined during scrutiny. It ruled that reopening based on the same material amounts to a change of opinion and is invalid.
The court held that passing an assessment order without granting personal hearing violates principles of natural justice. It set aside the order and remanded the matter for fresh consideration.
The court examined whether delay in filing returns during insolvency proceedings constituted genuine hardship. It held that delay caused due to CIRP and management transition must be condoned to avoid unjust denial of tax benefits.
The court ruled that objections to territorial jurisdiction must be raised in the written statement. Late objections cannot be entertained and are deemed waived.
The Court held that cancellation for non-filing of returns can be reconsidered if the taxpayer files pending returns and clears dues. Authorities must examine such applications under Rule 22.
The Court held that blocking ITC without available credit in the ledger is beyond statutory powers. It ruled that negative blocking is impermissible and directed restoration of the credit.
