NCLAT Delhi held that granting waiver u/s. 244(1)(b) of the Companies Act, 2013 justified in a petition alleging oppression and mismanagement in the Calcutta Cricket & Football Club. Accordingly, appeal dismissed.
That apart, the Courts have the discretion to decide whether the interest is payable from the date of institution of the suit, a period prior to that, or from the date of the decree, depending on the specific facts of each case.
Bombay High Court held that department have acted contrary to the SOP under section 144B of the Income Tax Act violating the principles of natural justice. Accordingly, assessment order passed thereon is liable to be quashed.
Bombay High Court reviews Shell India’s challenge to the 2016-17 assessment order under Section 144C. Dispute involved Relaxation Act applicability.
Telangana High Court directed petitioner to file an appeal before appellate authority due to availability of alternative remedy in the matter of imposition of penalty under section 114(iii) of the Customs Act.
ITAT Delhi held that reopening of assessment under section 148 of the Income Tax Act based on incorrect facts and incorrect recording of reasons is invalid and bad-in-law. Accordingly, reopening is liable to be quashed.
ITAT Delhi held that concealment of income via bogus share capital transaction duly attracts levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, appeal of assessee dismissed and penalty upheld.
ITAT Delhi held that approval memo u/s. 153D of the Income Tax Act is totally silent on the issues involved and has been granted omnibus approval without any thoughtful process being discernible. Thus, assessment order vitiated due to such mechanical approval.
Madras High Court held that imposition of interest and penalty unwarranted as Input Tax Credit wrongly availed is reversed without utilization. Accordingly, since Input Tax Credit is not utilised, interest and penalty is not justified.
ITAT Bangalore exempts Canara Bank from MAT, citing Delhi HC rulings on non-applicability of Section 115JB to banking companies before 2012 amendment.
