The Bombay High Court dismissed Revenue’s appeal against Everest Kanto Cylinder Ltd., citing prior judgments on identical transfer pricing issues.
Delhi High Court sends Pushpa Saluja’s appeal back to ITAT, questioning Section 68 application on alleged bogus purchases and full addition.
Rajkot ITAT condones 98-day appeal filing delay, citing taxpayer’s illiteracy and prior consultant’s negligence, prioritizing substantial justice.
Pune ITAT remands Sahyogh Nagri Sahkari Patsanstha Maryadit’s appeal, ruling non-payment of advance tax alone cannot dismiss an appeal; directs re-adjudication on merits.
CESTAT Chennai dismisses Customs’ appeal, confirming ‘Namkeen System’ as a frying machine under CTH 84198110, not ‘other kitchen machines.’
Calcutta High Court remands GST case involving Enkebee Infratech, directing a fresh review of discrepancies related to IGST and invoice values.
ITAT Delhi held that software expense has not given any benefit of enduring nature and hence the same is not capital in nature. Accordingly, software expense allowed as revenue expenditure.
The petitioner had entered into an agreement for civil works to be undertaken for the project with a company known as Al Fara’a Infra Projects Private Limited vide an agreement dated 27.4.2016.
ITAT Hyderabad held that CIT(A) inspite of declining to condone the delay considered and decided the matter on merits means that CIT(A) has impliedly condoned the delay involved in the appeal.
ITAT Ahmedabad rules on Vikas Vijay Gupta vs PCIT, confirming the validity of revision under Section 263 for a wrongly issued penalty notice. Procedural errors in penalty proceedings are rectifiable by PCIT.
