The Bombay High Court held that the 2019 amendment to Section 54(1) of the GST Act applies prospectively and does not govern refund claims relating to periods before 1 February 2019. The refund applications were directed to be processed.
The Bombay High Court held that reassessment beyond four years was invalid because the assessee had fully and truly disclosed all material facts during the original assessment. The notice under Section 148 and related proceedings were quashed.
The Bombay High Court held that sanction under Section 151(i) instead of Section 151(ii) for AYs 2016-17 and 2017-18 rendered reassessment notices invalid. It also quashed the consequential assessment orders and demand notices.
The Bombay High Court upheld the CESTAT’s finding that there was no evidence the Customs Broker advised the importer to violate customs laws or evade examination. It dismissed the Revenue’s appeal after holding that no substantial question of law arose.
The Bombay High Court held that Section 41D of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act does not authorize the Charity Commissioner to direct enrollment of new members or fresh elections. Orders issued beyond statutory powers were declared without jurisdiction.
The Bombay High Court held that recovery proceedings cannot continue while the statutory period to file an appeal under Section 112 of the CGST Act remains available. It ruled that premature recovery would render the statutory appellate remedy ineffective.
The Bombay High Court upheld the CESTAT order after finding that denial of cross-examination violated Regulation 17(4) of the CBLR, rendering the proceedings against the Customs Broker invalid. The Revenue’s appeal was dismissed.
The Bombay High Court directed revival of the assessee’s appeal after the Supreme Court remanded Section 151A reassessment matters for fresh consideration. The Court allowed the assessee to raise all legal and factual grounds, including limitation, before the Commissioner (Appeals).
The Bombay High Court held that royalty refunded by a foreign company to its Indian subsidiary under an Advance Pricing Agreement could not be taxed as its income. The Court also ruled that the APA governed the determination of the arm’s length price for the covered assessment years.
The Bombay High Court held that interest under Section 234D applies to excess income tax refunds issued before June 1, 2003, by following its earlier binding decision. The ITAT order was set aside and the Revenue’s appeal was allowed.
