Delhi High Court held that deduction of tax by Land Acquisition Collector is duly, however, the same was not reflected in Form 26AS. Thus, petitioner cannot be penalized for mere reason that Form 26AS suffered from a discrepancy.
Delhi High Court held that cancellation of GST registration with retrospective effect without providing any intelligible reason for cancellation is unsustainable. Accordingly, impugned cancellation order is void.
Where AO failed to issue a notice under Section 143(2) and proceed directly by rejecting the return filed by assessee, the reassessment action would thus be liable to be quashed.
Delhi High Court held that that there was no justification for the respondents to issue notices afresh seeking to reopen the proceedings which had been concluded prior to the judgment passed in Ashish Agarwal.
Delhi High Court clarifies taxability of profits attributed to a Permanent Establishment (PE) under the India-UAE DTAA, even when global losses are incurred.
Delhi High Court addresses Ericsson’s challenge to CCI jurisdiction over Standard Essential Patents (SEPs) and royalty claims under the Competition Act.
Delhi High Court held that cancellation of a tax payer’s GST registration does not absolve the tax payer from being held accountable for any statutory non-compliance or absolves it from any liability under the statute.
Delhi High Court held that initiation of reassessment under section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act merely on the basis of DVO report without application of mind by the AO is unsustainable and liable to be quashed.
Reassessment under section 147 was not justified as there was no “close nexus” or “live link” between tangible material and the reason to believe that income had escaped assessment.
Delhi HC rules department cannot pass adverse orders without giving taxpayers a reasonable opportunity of hearing under CGST Act in Mohinder Kumar Vs. Pr. Commissioner case.
