The tribunal ruled that reliance only on an investigation report without independent evidence cannot justify treating LTCG as bogus. Additions under Section 68 and commission were deleted.
The Tribunal held that industrial tariff charged by electricity boards is the correct benchmark for CPP transactions. It rejected the use of generator procurement rates adopted by the TPO.
SC allowed classification of Odomos under HSN 38089191 to stand, holding that market identity and consumer understanding supported its treatment as a mosquito repellent.
The Court held that reassessment proceedings must be initiated within the statutory time limit. It found the notice issued after the deadline to be invalid.
The Court found that the authority failed to follow mandatory procedure under Rule 92(3) before rejecting the refund. It held that absence of hearing and improper notice rendered the order invalid.
Madras High Court held that use of visual identifiers on packaging like fonts, symbols, colours, etc. establishes brandname for GST purpose. However, since there was no suppression of fact invocation of extended period denied.
ITAT Delhi held that companies owning and operating channels cannot be compared with distribution company for the purpose of transfer pricing. Accordingly, directs TPO to exclude such comparables for benchmarking distribution segment and determination of ALP.
The Court examined whether employees could be penalised under Section 122(1A) for company-level GST violations. It held that only “taxable persons” fall within the scope of the provision, excluding employees without independent registration.
The Tribunal examined disallowance made for delayed employee contributions under Section 143(1). It held that debatable issues cannot be adjusted at the processing stage, resulting in relief to the assessee. The ruling clarifies procedural boundaries.
The issue involved validity of penalty proceedings initiated through an unsigned notice. The Tribunal ruled that such a notice is invalid and cannot confer jurisdiction. The decision highlights the mandatory requirement of proper authentication.
