ITAT Ahmedabad held that assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of revenue. Hence, revisionary jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act not justifiable as twin pre-conditions not satisfied.
During pendency of the assessment proceedings, respondent No.1 filed application u/s. 245C(1) before the Income Tax Settlement Commission offering additional income of Rs.17 Crores for the assessment years from 2011-12 to 2017-18.
Bombay High Court held that exercising extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India not justified as alternate and efficacious remedy already available with the petitioner. Hence, writ petition dismissed.
Interest paid on late payment of TDS was not an expenditure wholly and exclusively incurred for the purpose of business and further it was a payment, which was in the form of tax, so it was not an allowable expenditure.
CESTAT Chandigarh rules that Supreme Court clarifications do not justify invoking the extended limitation period in service tax disputes. Key case insights inside.
Pursuant to the execution of CEPA, a meeting was held at the Directorate General of Foreign Trade (DGFT) headquarters for consideration of the allocation of the bullion TRQs under the CEPA for the Financial Year 2024-25.
ITAT Delhi allows India Thermit Corporation’s appeal, ruling that scrutiny assessment under Section 143(2) bars summary processing under Section 143(1).
The Officer was directed for fresh consideration of Penalty @200% for non-generation of an e-invoice as there was a failure on the part of the department to consider relevant GST circular No. 10/2019 dated 31.05.2019.
Assessee had consistently shown the plots as investments in earlier years and that the nature of income could not be determined solely based on the nature of the business for tax audit purposes.
Gujarat High Court sets aside GST registration cancellation orders, citing lack of reasons and hearing opportunity. Case remanded for due process compliance.
