ITAT Delhi held that claim of interest u/s. 24b of the Income Tax Act was duly examined during original as well as reassessment proceedings. Thus, the plausible view having been taken by the AO cannot be held to be prejudicial to the interests of Revenue.
Himachal Pradesh High Court held that accused is rightly convicted of the commission of an offence punishable under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act since it is duly proved that accused has failed to pay money to the complainant.
ITAT Mumbai held that denial of exemption under section 54 of the Income Tax Act on account of non-utilization of consideration not justified as utilization done within extended time limit for making the investment under the TOLA. Accordingly, exemption u/s. 54 granted and appeal allowed.
Gauhati High Court held that non-communication of ‘reasons to believe’ to the arrestee in the matter of fraudulent availment of ITC under GST vitiates the process and undermines the safeguards guaranteed under law, rendering the arrest procedurally infirm. Accordingly, interim bail granted.
NCLAT Delhi held that delay of 147 days in refiling of an appeal against National Financial Reporting Authority [NFRA] order without any satisfying reasons is not condonable. Accordingly, appeal dismissed and delay not condoned.
Delhi High Court held that bail application dismissed as there are reasonable grounds to believe that the accusations in money laundering case against the Appellant appear prima facie to be true. Accordingly, bail application rejected.
ITAT Raipur set aside ex-parte order passed by CIT(A) since the reason for non-compliance by the assessee before CIT(A)/NFAC was that the hearing notices have been sent in the wrong email id by the department. Accordingly, matter of accommodation entries remanded back to CIT(A).
ITAT Raipur held that in case of bogus/ sham transactions it is the responsibility of revenue authorities to investigate and decide that whether bogus transactions fall within the category of tax planning or tax evasion. Accordingly, matter restored back to AO for fresh consideration.
Karnataka High Court rules clerical errors in tax invoices, without intent to evade tax, do not justify confiscation of goods under Section 130 of the CGST Act.
Bangalore ITAT cancels reassessment proceedings against Amit Kumar Banthia (HUF) due to the Assessing Officer’s failure to follow mandatory procedures.
