ITAT Delhi held that multiple residential units on same floor is construed as single residential house for purpose of exemption under section 54 of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, exemption u/s. 54 allowed and addition deleted.
Delhi High Court held that Customs Broker failure to oversee the clearance and the warehousing of the goods imported with intention to re-export leading to diversion of the goods in the domestic market is a clear violation. However, suspension of license for 13 months is sufficient.
ITAT Kolkata upholds Rs.17.10 crore penny stock addition against Narayan Suppliers Pvt Ltd, flags money laundering, and directs case referral to ED and CBI for further probe.
ITAT Chennai invalidated reassessment in Pawan Cargo Forwards’ case due to notice issued by JAO, not FAO, violating the CBDT’s 2022 faceless scheme. Penny stock addition deleted.
NCLT Chennai held that as per section 128 of the Indian Contract Act, the liability of guarantor is coextensive with that of the Borrower. Accordingly, application u/s. 7 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code against Corporate Guarantor admitted.
NCLT Ahmedabad admitted CIRP application under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code by Central Bank of India [Financial Creditor] against M/s. Repute Foods Pvt. Ltd. [Corporate Debtor] as debt and default established.
CESTAT Delhi held that customs authorities cannot question the discharge certificate issued by DGFT in respect of the export obligation in respect of EPCG License. Accordingly, confiscation of goods and imposition of penalty set aside.
SC dismissed an appeal by tax authorities, upholding a trader’s claim that purchases were tax-exempt as they were made for out-of-state principals.
NCLT Kolkata held that financial creditors can file simultaneously two application under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 against the principal borrower and corporate guarantor. Accordingly, CIRP application against corporate debtor allowed as debt and default proved.
Karnataka HC emphasized that availability of records with the tax authorities allows reconciliation of ITC even if the show-cause notice reply is pending. The order highlights procedural fairness and proper ITC verification under GST law.
