Supreme Court held that as there is no final assessment in fake invoice case made under GST Act, the appellant cannot be said to be under a legal liability. Accordingly, condition of pre-deposit for grant of anticipatory bail not imposable.
CESTAT Chennai held that extended period of limitation not invocable as there is no suppression of facts with the intend to evade payment of tax. Accordingly, order dismissed on the grounds of limitation.
Orissa High Court held that petitioner-dealer has right to cross-examine the selling dealers, however, as more than two decades elapsed it might not be practical. Accordingly, assessment would stand completed at the figures disclosed in the return of petitioner-dealer.
ITAT Pune held that as NFAC dismissed the claim of deduction u/s 80P on legal issue without considering the case on merits, matter remanded back for fresh adjudication.
HC set aside cancellation order of GST Registration of assessee on the grounds that non-submission of reply to Show Cause Notice cannot be a ground for cancellation of GST Registration.
Calcutta High Court held that invocation of provisions of rule 8D(2)(ii) of the Income Tax Rules by AO without examining the accounts of the assessee and without examining the claim made by the assessee is unjustified.
Gujarat High Court allows Apex Formulations Pvt Ltd’s petition challenging CGST appeal on refund denial. Remands to Appellate Authority for fresh consideration.
ITAT Delhi held that reassessment proceedings without issuance of notice under section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act is bad in law and liable to be quashed.
NSPIRA Management Services Private Limited Vs DCIT & ACIT (Telangana High Court) From a perusal of the impugned order dated 16.12.2022, it is seen that respondent No.1 had followed instructions of the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) dated 31.07.2017 to the effect that where outstanding demand is disputed before the appellate authority, the assessee […]
Ashok Kumar Garg Vs ACIT (Delhi High Court) According to the petitioner, although the amount of alleged bogus purchase bills has been quantified as Rs.24,10,705/- the amount in issue is only Rs.13,73,503/-. It is, thus, the petitioner’s case that Rs.10,37,202/- has been wrongly included. Mr Puneet Rai, learned senior standing counsel, who appears on behalf […]
