The Court found that the ITAT wrongly held there was no business income despite the assessment record showing income under “Business and profession.” The finding was held to be perverse and the orders were set aside.
The High Court revisited reassessment disputes after the Supreme Court took note of the retrospective insertion of Section 147A. The matters were remanded for fresh consideration with liberty to challenge the amended provision.
Smt. Jayamma W/O. Late Sri. Kalegowda Vs Directorate of Enforcement (Karnataka High Court) The Karnataka High Court considered a challenge to a provisional attachment order issued by the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) under Section 5 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA). The petitioner contended that the ED had failed to comply with […]
The High Court held that the statutory requirement of issuing a draft assessment order could not be bypassed by issuing a final order accompanied by tax demand and penalty proceedings.
The Karnataka High Court set aside GST registration cancellation after finding that the taxpayer was in custody and unable to respond to the show cause notice. The Court held that the proceedings violated principles of natural justice.
The Karnataka High Court directed that a fresh refund application be treated as filed on the date of the original application. The period spent addressing repeated deficiency memos was excluded for limitation purposes.
The High Court accepted a mediation settlement resolving long-pending land acquisition disputes involving compensation, interest, and pending proceedings. The settlement was treated as a final and binding resolution between the parties.
The Karnataka High Court ruled that appellate authorities are empowered to entertain claims not made before the Assessing Officer. The absence of a revised return did not bar consideration of the claim.
The High Court set aside the Single Judge’s order and remitted the matter for fresh consideration following the Supreme Court’s directions on the retrospective insertion of Section 147A. The assessee was granted liberty to challenge the amended provision.
The Karnataka High Court set aside the dismissal of a GST appeal that was rejected due to a 451-day delay. Relying on an earlier coordinate bench ruling, the Court remanded the matter for consideration on merits.
