Delhi High Court held that CESTAT does not have the power to admit appeal without the pre-deposit. However, since this is not a rare case necessitating interference, this court has not granted waiver from pre-deposit.
ITAT Pune rules that PCIT cannot revise an assessment under Section 263 if the AO took a plausible view. The 10% tolerance limit under Section 43CA is retrospective.
Andhra Pradesh High Court held that petition cannot be entertained since the inordinate delay, in approaching the court, has not been satisfactorily explained. Accordingly, writ in GST matter dismissed.
The Gujarat High Court ruled that tax authorities cannot use Section 74 for extended recovery without proving fraud, if Section 73 time limits have passed.
ITAT Chennai held that addition under section 69A of the Income Tax Act towards cash deposit during demonetization not justified since assessee has sufficiently explained that the said deposit is from earlier withdrawal. Accordingly, appeal allowed.
The Supreme Court affirmed that GST authorities cannot determine the eligibility of Input Tax Credit during refund proceedings, upholding a Delhi High Court ruling.
The Supreme Court affirmed that services provided by Indian entities to foreign universities for student admissions are considered “export of services” and are eligible for an IGST refund.
Pune ITAT deletes disallowance of cash-based remuneration to partners and salaries to employees, finding no legal bar or evidence of inflated expenses.
ITAT Delhi sets aside an order against Credulity Solutions, citing a violation of natural justice after the CIT(A) failed to consider uploaded documents.
Supreme Court reviews CESTAT order in Suresh Kumar & Co. Impex case, emphasizing that electronic evidence compliance under Section 138C(4) can be satisfied through signed records and statements.
