Reassessment notice issued to assessee by AO was quashed due to non-compliance with the statutory requirement of providing a minimum of seven days for the taxpayer to furnish a reply under Section 148A(b).
Assessee had filed Form No.10AB under section 80G(5). Although, assessee-trust was registered on 01.09.2013, it received provisional approval on 16.09.2022 under first proviso to section 80F (5) (iv), valid until AY 2025-26.
Petitioner submits that the respondent issued an ASMT-10 notice dated 03.07.2023, indicating a mismatch between the amounts in FORM 26AS and FORM GSTR-1, which comes to Rs.69 lakhs.
Madras High Court held that order confirming tax liability and imposing penalty on ground of mismatch of input tax claim between GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A set aside as order passed without giving opportunity of being heard.
Himachal Pradesh High Court held that prima facie investigation cannot be basis of an order of cancellation of GST registration. Drastic penalty of cancellation of GST registration can be imposed only after completion of investigation.
Madras High Court held that benefit of section 10B of the Income Tax Act available even before setting off of unabsorbed depreciation and brought-forward losses. Accordingly, matter decided in favour of assessee.
Madras High Court held that order set aside as petitioner was unaware of notices being uploaded on GST common portal. Accordingly, respondent directed to pass fresh order on merits.
Vide the present appeal, the assessee has challenged only two issues regarding disallowance of Rs. 1,99,291 towards motor car & Rs.29,345 on motor bikes; and adhoc disallowance towards salary, rent, machine charges & bonus.
Delhi High Court held that initiation of reassessment proceedings under section 148 of the Income Tax Act unsustainable as impugned notice issued in the name of dead person.
CESTAT Ahmedabad rules that oil in bunker tanks is integral to vessels, affecting customs duty. Appeals allowed following Supreme Court’s decision.
