ITAT Bangalore held that hearing notices sent by CIT(A) was not received by the assessee since notices were sent to old auditor’s email ID. Thus, non-appearance was neither wilful nor wanton hence ex-parte order of CIT(A) set aside.
Considering the judgment of Alnavar Credit Souharda Co-op Ltd noted above the AO is directed to decide the issue afresh regarding the claim of deduction made by the assessee.
Madras High Court remitted the matter back for fresh consideration in the matter of denial of Input Tax Credit (ITC) on Zero Rated Sales effected under section 18 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax (TNVAT) Act, 2006.
ITAT Bangalore directed authorities not to dismiss rectification application u/s. 154 on the ground of limitation as the assessee was erroneously misled to deposit taxes and it is settled law that no tax can be collected without authority of law.
CESTAT Bangalore held that there is no requirement to make declaration of MRP in bill of entry under notification no. 21/2012-Cus. Dated 17.03.2012 granting exemption of 4% of SAD.
Karnataka High Court held that since rectification application was filed before passing of final assessment order, DRP ought to have waited till disposal of rectification application. Thus, final assessment order liable to be set aside.
Calcutta High Court dismisses revenue appeal, affirming ITAT’s decision to invalidate reassessment on alleged bogus long-term capital gains already disclosed in return.
Jharkhand High Court upholds GST ITC time limit under Section 16(4) and validity of GSTR-3B under Rule 61(5), referencing 53rd GST Council recommendations.
ITAT Delhi orders reassessment in Anita Dabas Vs ITO case due to non-speaking order and lack of fair hearing by CIT(A).
Nagpur ITAT finds no obligation for rectification under Section 154 if clear data is missing in Hariom Biotech Agri Farming Vs DCIT case.
