Bombay High Court sets aside personal liability for One Person Company director in arbitration, upholding asset deposit by the company. Judgment clarifies Section 17 powers.
Madras HC sets aside a GST assessment order, ruling that tax authorities cannot invoke extended limitation period under Section 74 without explicitly proving fraud, wilful misstatement, or suppression of facts.
ITAT Raipur remands tax appeals for Brajesh Singh Bhadoria, citing ex-parte orders and natural justice violations. The ruling emphasizes the right to be heard and the proper adjudication of merits at the first appellate level, referencing key judicial precedents.
Telangana High Court sets aside assessment order against Durga Bhavani Enterprises, ruling the show cause notice was issued beyond the statutory limitation period under CGST Act.
Karnataka High Court set aside state GST notices against Toyota Kirloskar Motor, citing dual proceedings. Central GST notice to be re-examined.
Madras High Court held that the PMLA demands the existence of a predicate offence. When there is no predicate offence, initiation of proceedings under PMLA is a non starter. Thus, no predicate offence, no action by ED.
This Court considering the nature of the cargo and considering the facts that the said cargo had arrived at Chennai Port on 29.11.2024, deemed it fit to direct Revenue to reconsider the impugned order within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Significant to note that the assessment order was passed in the backdrop of information received from the French Government under the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA), indicating that assessee held bank accounts in HSBC Private Bank (Suisse), SA, Switzerland.
When sales were not doubted, entire purchases could not be disallowed merely on the ground that suppliers were non-genuine, it was deemed appropriate to restore the matter back to the file of AO for carrying out limited verification and addition should be restricted to profit estimation.
Gujarat High Court held that since provisions of DTAA would override the provisions of the Domestic Act where the provisions of the DTAA are more beneficial to the assessee. Thus, section 206AA of the Income Tax Act doesn’t override the provisions of 90(2) of the Income Tax Act.
