Bombay High Court held that seventh proviso in Section 2(b) of the Maharashtra Entertainments Duty Act (MED) is constitutionally valid and entertainment duty leviable on convenience fees collected for online ticket booking.
ITAT Delhi ruled that an AO cannot reject a registered valuer’s report without DVO reference, upholding the statutory procedure for property valuation.
The ITAT Ahmedabad quashed a reassessment for AY 2012–13, ruling the property sale transaction occurred in an earlier year, invalidating the additions made.
The ITAT Ahmedabad deleted an addition of Rs. 18.51 lakh, ruling that pre-marriage gifts and substantiated contract income were not unexplained cash deposits.
The ITAT Ahmedabad quashed reassessments for AYs 2017-18 & 2018-19, ruling notices issued beyond 3 years were invalid as the escaped income was below Rs. 50 lakhs.
NCLAT Delhi held that amount having not been received from the corporate debtor, there was no applicability of Section 14 of the IBC and moratorium was not applicable with regard to any payment by co-applicant. Thus, direction of adjudicating authority for reversal of amount is unsustainable.
The Patna High Court ruled that the limitation period for GST refund claims under Section 77 begins from the date of paying the correct tax, not the original payment.
A Punjab and Haryana High Court ruling mandates a customs duty refund and ₹50 lakhs compensation for perishable goods that were obstructed and ruined.
Himachal Pradesh High Court held that extinguishment of debt under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code [IBC] wouldn’t ipso facto apply to extinguishment of criminal proceedings under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act [NI Act]. Accordingly, present petition fails.
Jharkhand High Court held that order passed u/s. 74 of the Jharkhand Goods and Services Tax Act no reasons whatsoever have been assigned for agreeing with the order passed by the Assessing Authority. Thus, absence of reasons is clearly suggestive of the order being arbitrary hence legally unsustainable.
