Bombay High Court restored GST registration subject to payment of outstanding GST dues, interest, late fees and penalty within prescribed timelines.
The Court held that Section 263 could not be invoked where the AO had made inquiries and accepted the assessee’s explanation.
The High Court held that disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D cannot exceed the exempt income earned during the assessment year.
Bombay HC admitted the Revenue’s appeal on AMP expenditure and payments to doctors, holding both require judicial examination. It refused to admit the depreciation issue as earlier rulings had been accepted without any change in facts.
Bombay High Court held that SION Entry E75 permits import of maize without restricting its variety, allowing popcorn maize under the DFIA Scheme.
The High Court held that failure to pass the order giving effect within the time prescribed under Section 153 resulted in abatement of the assessment proceedings. It ruled that the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) could not survive once the assessment itself had abated.
The Bombay High Court upheld the Tribunals order, holding that acceptance of the assessees explanation on reconciliation of professional receipts did not raise any substantial question of law.
The Bombay High Court quashed the reassessment proceedings after holding that approval was granted by the PCIT instead of the competent authority under Section 151(ii). The Court applied its earlier ruling and set aside the order and notice.
The Bombay High Court held that reassessment proceedings for AY 2018-19 were invalid because the sanction was granted by the PCIT instead of the PCCIT, as required under Section 151(ii). The Court quashed both the Section 148A(d) order and the Section 148 notice.
The Bombay High Court held that proceedings under Section 153C were barred by limitation as the assessments were not completed within the statutory period. It quashed the notices issued for Assessment Years 2014-15 to 2019-20.
