ITAT Mumbai held that the Assessing Officer made detailed enquiries before allowing ESOP expenditure, invalidating the PCIT’s revision under section 263.
The Court restrained recovery of VAT interest from United Spirits, observing uncertainty on whether Extra Neutral Alcohol falls under VAT or new tax regime.
The Gujarat AAR held that fusible interlining fabrics of cotton are classifiable under Chapter 52 and not Chapter 59. The ruling followed Gujarat High Court and Supreme Court decisions confirming that partially coated fabrics do not fall under Chapter 5903.
Gujarat High Court held that it would not be appropriate to invoke its extraordinary discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in the present case involving possession and control of assets with corporate debtor during liquidation.
Madras High Court held that the matter involving sexual harassment complaint against IRS officer needs a fresh inquiry. Accordingly, High Court directs Internal Complaints Committee [ICC] to be re-constituted. Further, High Court also issued a series of directions for conduct of inquiry.
Delhi High Court held that Indian Institution providing educational consultation to students in India and Foreign Educational Institution paying commission thereof cannot be considered as intermediary service. Accordingly, writ petition of revenue dismissed.
Andhra Pradesh High Court ruled that a single, composite GST show cause notice or assessment order covering multiple financial years is impermissible under the GST Act. The court set aside the orders and directed authorities to initiate fresh, year-specific proceedings.
Delhi High Court admitted petitions challenging GST Notification No. 40/2021, which petitioners argue violates Article 14 and Section 164 of the GST Acts. The court ordered interim protection, directing that no coercive steps be taken until the next hearing.
The Mumbai ITAT partly allowed Trustar Diamond’s appeal, reducing the addition on alleged bogus diamond purchases from 12.5% to 3% to maintain consistency with the assessee’s previous assessment years. The court noted that sales figures were accepted and the 3% restriction reflected the historical disallowance pattern.
Allahabad High Court applied the doctrine of comity to quash a GST appellate order, directing a fresh decision in line with the un-appealed Bombay High Court judgment on the definition of service ‘recipient’ under the IGST Act.
