Tribunal held that 2022 amendment to Section 11(3) applies prospectively, allowing trusts to utilise past accumulations within six years under old law. Additions made under Section 115BBI were deleted.
Some of the concerns which were raised by assessee such as right to privacy of the family being violated, etc., deserve to be addressed as any family-related CCTV footage which was with the GST department and violated the privacy of family members could not be used or disseminated in any manner.
While securing the Revenues interest under Section 110A of the Customs Act, conditions for provisional release should not be unduly harsh. Requirement to furnish Bank Guarantee of ₹22 lakhs was modified with execution of bond of Rs. 22 lakh.
CESTAT Delhi held that penalty under section 117 of the Customs Act, 1962 rightly imposed on courier agency for lack of due diligence since red sandalwood was mis-declared as copper wire in export consignment. Accordingly, penalty of Rs. 1 Lakh imposed.
Supreme Court held that demand notice stands invalid in the eye of law when amount mentioned and demanded in notice send under Proviso (b) to section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act is different from actual cheque amount.
NCLT Ahmedabad held that application u/s. 30(6) of IBC by Resolution Professional not admitted inspite of approval by the sole unsecured financial creditor since it is not in compliance with section 30(2) of the Code, insofar as the dues of the state tax department under GVAT are not considered.
The Supreme Court set aside the e-auction of a DDA plot by Corporation Bank, ruling the underlying mortgage was void ab initio for lacking the mandatory prior consent of the Lieutenant Governor.
The Ministry of Coal hails the GST Council’s reform, which removes the ₹400/ tonne Compensation Cess and raises the GST rate to 18%. This lowers the overall tax burden on coal, cuts power generation costs by 17-18 paise/kWh, eliminates inverted duty anomaly, and strengthens domestic production for AatmNirbharta.
NCLAT Delhi held that demand made by the EPFO on the basis of an inspection report made after initiation of moratorium is not enforceable as Section 14(1) of the IBC prohibits the initiation or continuation of assessment during the moratorium period.
Madras High Court held that MEIS would clearly qualify as an instrument u/s. 28AAA of the Customs Act bestowing financial or fiscal benefits, however, only Director General of Foreign Trade [DGFT] is empowered to cancel or suspend the same.
