The court held that a sanctioned rehabilitation scheme directing waiver of dues is binding on customs authorities. As a result, the pre-deposit ordered by the Tribunal was set aside.
The Court found that statutory notices were properly issued but went unanswered by legal heirs. To balance equities, the assessment was quashed and remitted subject to a 20% pre-deposit of disputed tax excluding interest.
The High Court held that long-held, undeveloped land sold by the assessee gave rise to capital gains. Intention, holding period, and conduct outweighed Revenue assumptions.
Madras High Court held that benefit of amnesty notification no. 7/2023-Central Tax dated 31.03.2023, and was amended by notification no.25/2023-Central Tax dated 17.07.2023 for late fee waiver has to be extended to all taxpayers who filed their GST Annual Returns [GSTR-9 and GSTR-9C] before issuance of above notification i.e. before 01.04.2023.
Madras High Court held that reassessment notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act for Assessment Year 2014-2015 issued on 29.07.2022 issued under new regime is held to be in time. Accordingly, writ petition stands dismissed.
The High Court upheld rejection of a limitation plea raised only at the hearing stage. It held that without supporting facts on record, such a plea cannot be entertained.
The High Court held that the “relevant period” under Rule 89(4) must be applied uniformly for ITC, turnover, and adjusted turnover. Selective interpretation for refund computation was rejected.
The High Court held that Notifications extending GST limitation were vitiated and illegal. As a result, the assessment order based on them was set aside and remanded for fresh consideration.
The Court quashed a confirmed GST demand after noting that the taxpayer had not replied on merits to the show cause notice. The case was remanded with directions to deposit 10% of the disputed tax and file a detailed reply.
The Court quashed reversal of input tax credit where claims fell within the extended period under amended Section 16, holding that limitation under the earlier provision could no longer be enforced.
