The Court observed that the Income Tax Department acted without due verification in raising a demand on a deactivated PAN. Since the Department had already recognized the active PAN in earlier proceedings, the fresh demand appeared erroneous and procedurally invalid. Justice C. Saravanan granted an interim stay and sought production of the relevant assessment records. The case highlights the need for robust PAN verification before initiating recovery actions.
The Bombay High Court confirmed a 15% addition on alleged bogus purchases, rejecting the Revenue’s plea for full disallowance. The Court held that reliance solely on Sales Tax Department data, without giving the assessee cross-examination rights, violates natural justice. With concurrent factual findings by lower authorities, no substantial question of law was found to arise.
The ITAT Delhi partly allowed an appeal, restricting a Rs. 10 lakh cash deposit addition to 1 lakh after the assessee, a salaried individual, explained the source as family savings from disclosed income. The Tribunal used a reasonable estimate approach, finding neither the assessee’s full explanation nor the Revenue’s complete rejection of evidence to be fully warranted, granting Rs. 9 lakh relief.
Bombay High Court quashed reassessment proceedings initiated using data from a valid IDS declaration, holding that once accepted under the Income Disclosure Scheme, the Revenue cannot revisit or reassess the same income.
ITAT Hyderabad held that exemption under section 10(1) of the Income Tax Act towards income derived from sale of foundation seeds as agricultural income allowed. Accordingly, appeal of revenue dismissed and order of CIT(A) upheld.
NCLT Cuttack held that application under section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code for initiating Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process [CIRP] against Bhilai Jaypee Cement Limited [Corporate Debtor] is liable to be admitted since operational debt and default is proved.
Gujarat High Court ruled that the time taken to process a GST refund application until a deficiency memo is issued must be excluded from the two-year limitation period under Section 54.
NCLT Mumbai held that application under section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against Cab-Eez Infra Tech Limited [Corporate Debtor] admitted as operational debt and default thereon established.
The Gujarat High Court quashed a VAT Tribunal order, restoring an appeal and remanding the matter for fresh consideration because the Tribunal failed to address all specific grounds raised by the petitioner.
NCLT Ahmedabad held that application under section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process [CIRP] against Blu-Smart Mobility Tech Private Limited (Corporate Debtor) as operational debt and default in payment established.
