The Bombay High Court held that reassessment proceedings could not be initiated on the issue of broken period interest when the legal position had already been settled by binding precedents. The Court quashed the notices issued under Sections 148A and 148.
The Bombay High Court held that limitation under Section 35 of the Goa VAT Act must be computed after excluding the COVID period where the assessment order itself was served during that period. The matter was remanded for fresh consideration of delay condonation.
Bombay High Court quashed income tax reassessment proceedings after holding that the PAN was not transferred to the competent jurisdictional officer and the Section 148 notice was issued by an officer lacking authority.
The Court held that although filing the audit report along with the return is directory, complete failure to furnish the report is fatal to the deduction claim. The ruling emphasizes that statutory benefits cannot be granted without substantive compliance.
The Court held that the arrest violated Section 35 of the BNSS because the reasons recorded were generic and not specific to the accused. The petitioner was ordered to be released on bail.
The Bombay High Court held that the CGST Act does not permit consolidation of different financial years and tax periods in a single Section 74 show cause notice. The impugned notice was quashed with liberty to issue fresh notices in accordance with law.
The Bombay High Court held that a 13-day delay in filing Form 10-IC should be condoned where eligibility for Section 115BAA was undisputed. The Court ruled that procedural requirements cannot override substantive statutory benefits.
The Court found that the tax treatment of advance sale of room nights had already been addressed in earlier decisions concerning the same assessee. The Revenue failed to show any reason for a different outcome.
The Court set aside the refund rejection after finding that the appellate authority failed to record specific findings or provide adequate reasons. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication.
The Bombay High Court held that Section 65 audit proceedings can be initiated even after GST registration is cancelled if the audit pertains to a period when the taxpayer was registered. Cancellation of registration does not extinguish statutory obligations relating to past tax periods.
