Volvo Group India Pvt Ltd. Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court) Conclusion: The order of the original authority becomes merged with the order of the Revisionary Authority. Since the Revisionary Authority was located within the territorial jurisdiction of the Principal Seat of this Court, assessee had the option to file the petitions here or […]
ITAT Bangalore held that addition u/s. 69A unjustified as cash deposited in bank account is from business income and the same is already considered under the Profits & gains of business or profession.
ITAT Delhi held that issue relating to allowance of depreciation on non-compete fee is debatable and it is well settled law that rectification provision u/s. 154 of the Income Tax Act cannot be invoked if the issue is debatable.
Calcutta High Court held that no interest liability or penalty can be thrust on the petitioner since full amount of tax already paid as per orders referred to in Section 128A(1)(b) of the CGST Act, 2017 and hence order deemed to be concluded.
Himachal Pradesh High Court held that attachment of account like Cash Credit or Overdraft by exercising powers conferred under section 226(3) of the Income Tax Act untenable as bank doesn’t become a debtor.
Chhattisgarh High Court held that addition u/s. 68 r.w.s. 69A of the Income Tax Act towards unexplained income sustained since assessee failed to substantiate the nature and source of cash deposits in bank.
Madras High Court held that passing of order without considering reply and without granting opportunity of being heard is against the principles of natural justice and accordingly the order is liable to be quashed.
Delhi High Court held that that non-payment of dues for a period of three months is not a prescribed ground under section 29 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act for cancelling the petitioner’s GST registration. Thus, order set aside.
ITAT Delhi held that addition under section 69A on account of income from undisclosed source sustained in assessee deliberately failed to produce all the books of accounts and no material evidence furnished by the assessee.
AO, however, did not accept the explanation of the assessee and the accumulation of income of Rs.5,92,352/-in A.Y. 2008-09, which was held as not applied within the stipulated period of 5 years, was treated as income of the current year.
