Assessee filed a writ petition challenging the Reserve Bank of India’s decision to return his compounding application. The application was filed after an adjudication order had already been passed against him under FEMA.
It was pertinent to note that assessee was an agriculturist and semiliterate person, not well versed with the income tax proceedings, therefore, it was the duty of AO to apprise him the correct position instead of putting an extra tax liability because of his ignorance.
Telangana High Court directs petitioner to take appropriate legal recourse under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 since matter involves gold smuggling and custody of petitioner’s husband thereon. Accordingly, writ not entertained.
Madras High Court held that delay of one day in filing of an appeal under GST is condonable since the reason assigned for the delay appears to be genuine. Accordingly, the delay condoned and writ allowed.
Andhra Pradesh High Court held that GST is not leviable on ocean freight charges, accordingly, refund of GST paid on ocean freight cannot be denied by applying period of limitation since payment of money cannot be treated as payment of tax.
ITAT Jaipur held that merely the claim of the assessee was not entertained it cannot be a reason automatically to levy the penalty for misreporting or under reporting of the income. Accordingly, levy of penalty under section 270A of the Income Tax Act set aside.
Since assessee was not allowed an opportunity to present all Bank Realization Certificates (BRCs) for the concerned shipping bills and produced documents before the authorities to substantiate that they were not liable to return the drawback amount.
Resolution plan for Steadfast Shipping Private Limited was approved under Section 31 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, after finding that the plan met all requirements under Section 30(2) of the Code and was approved by the Committee of Creditors (CoC) with 100% voting share.
Export incentives in terms of Notification No.19/2015-20 dated 17.08.2021 couldn’t be denied for inadvertent error in shipping bill as merely because of a software system was introduced, it would not mean that the software would override the principles of natural justice and rights of the parties.
State could not blacklist a company after approval of a resolution plan under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, and that the new management could not be punished for the actions of the old management.
