Madras High Court orders Department to review appeal by Sri Shanmuga Motors, filed beyond condonable period, on its merits, disregarding limitation issues.
Supreme Court while adjudicating matters emphasized the need to follow the legal framework laid down by statutory provisions for the withdrawal of petitions and settlement of claims in a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP).
CESTAT Kolkata taking a sympathetic view further reduced redemption fine and penalty on import of green peas due to extension of restriction. Redemption fine and penalty reduced to Rs. 25 Lakhs each.
Kerala High Court held that failure of investigating officer to seek permission before conducting further investigation cannot be the reason to held supplementary/additional final report invalid.
Held that Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules, as inserted by notification 53/2018-CT dated 09-10-2018 w.e.f. 23-10-2017 is declared ultra vires the provisions of Section 16 of the IGST Act and unenforceable on account of being manifestly arbitrary.
Bombay High Court directed the State of Maharashtra [including BMC, CIDCO, MIDC, MHADA, BEST and Municipal Corporation of Nagpur] to ensure that there is no abuse or misuse of public funds for issuing advertisements for extraneous purpose.
Additionally, the assessee had also entered into transaction for IT support services for a value of ₹1,61,29,274/- in respect of purchase of computer hardware components. AO made a reference to the TPO for determining/verifying the ALP.
ITAT Chennai held that the condonation of delay should not be dismissed for the reason that the appeal filed belatedly is not accompanied by condonation petition. Thus, order set aside and matter remanded back.
This would lead one to the inescapable conclusion of no perceivable or plausible tax liability possibly being created. Consequently, the proceedings initiated in terms of the impugned SCNs‟ and their continuance would be futile and impractical.
Further, in reference application filed under the Settlement Act, the Dy CST passed an order of settlement u/s 13(1) and arrived at the same figure of the settlement amount which were calculated by the assessee in its application.
