Gujarat High Court held that disallowance of claim made in return cannot amount to furnishing of inaccurate particulars. Accordingly, penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act cannot be levied in such case. Thus, appeal of revenue dismissed and questions of law answered in favour of assessee.
The Court held that refund claims filed within statutory limitation cannot be rejected merely due to filing after a cut-off date, striking down the impugned circular and directing refund processing.
The Court held that reassessment was invalid where deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) was lawfully claimed by a co-operative society. It ruled that interest from co-operative banks remains deductible when the assessee is not a co-operative bank.
The issue was whether penalties could be sustained without proper cross-examination of witnesses. The court held that ignoring Section 138B requirements vitiates the adjudication.
The court held that a shipping bill could be amended under Section 149 of the Customs Act to correct an inadvertent drawback entry, enabling release of IGST refund on zero-rated exports.
The issue concerned cancellation of GST registration for non-filing of returns and rejection of appeal as time-barred. The High Court restored the registration after noting that all returns were filed and dues paid.
The court examined whether reassessment could be initiated on vague and borrowed satisfaction. It held that absence of a live link between information and the assessee’s case invalidated the notice.
The High Court held that GST demands for periods prior to approval of a resolution plan cannot survive once the plan is sanctioned under the IBC. Past statutory dues not forming part of the plan stand extinguished and cannot be enforced.
The High Court stayed the passing of a final order after a GST demand was challenged for being issued without a DRC-01A pre-consultation notice. Authorities were restrained from concluding adjudication during pendency of the petition.
Gujarat High Court held that software consultancy services to parent company located outside India provided on principal to principal basis qualifies as export of service and cannot be considered as intermediary service.
