Calcutta High Court held that failure to investigate allocation of common head office expenses to eligible units rendered assessment erroneous and prejudicial to Revenue interests.
Delhi HC held that proviso to Section 45 of PMLA grants discretionary relief to women accused and stringent twin bail conditions would not ordinarily apply unless exceptional circumstances exist.
Gauhati High Court held that cancellation of GST registration without assigning reasons in FORM GST REG-19 was illegal and violated statutory requirements. The Court restored the matter and granted the taxpayer fresh opportunity to respond.
The Madras High Court quashed prosecution under Sections 276CC and 278B after finding that the petitioner had resigned as director before the relevant assessment year. The Court relied on Form No.32 filed with the Registrar of Companies.
Bombay High Court held that GST proceedings initiated against a company that had ceased to exist after amalgamation were void ab initio. The Court quashed the demand order passed in the name of the amalgamating entity.
High Court directed authorities to examine claims relating to additional road work, carriage charges, GST differential, and deductions from running bills. The Court refrained from deciding the merits and ordered consideration of pending representations.
Bombay High Court observed that payments made while search proceedings are continuing may not automatically qualify as voluntary deposits. Court granted tax authorities an opportunity to take corrective steps if refund entitlement exists.
The Delhi High Court held that material recovered during a search can validly form the basis of reassessment proceedings even if the search is later alleged to be illegal. The Court ruled that proceedings initiated on the basis of such material do not automatically become void.
The Kerala High Court held that delay condonation applications under Section 119(2)(b) must comply with the revised five-year limitation prescribed by CBDT circulars. The Court ruled that authorities cannot entertain applications filed beyond the revised period.
The Madras High Court refused to quash prosecution under Section 276C(2) after noting continued non-payment of admitted tax liability and prolonged default. The Court held that issues raised by the assessee should be decided during trial.
