AO noted that the assessee was unable to satisfied the ingredients of section 68 of the Income Tax Act. Thus, AO applied section 68 and added into total income and applied tax rate as per section 115BBE of the Act. Accordingly assessed income was determined at Rs.75,49,764.
ITAT Bangalore held that the addition of provision of bad and doubtful debts as per P&L account to determine the book profits u/s. 115JB of the act is not warranted as actual write off would not be hit by clause (i) of explanation to section 115JB.
Allahabad High Court held that in case of excess stock found at the time of survey proceedings u/s. 73/74 of GST Act should be initiated. Accordingly, initiating proceedings u/s. 130 read with rule 120 unsustainable and liable to be quashed.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that no disallowance under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act warranted as interest-free funds exceed the investments made, and there is no evidence to suggest that borrowed funds were used for such investments.
Delhi HC rules department cannot pass adverse orders without giving taxpayers a reasonable opportunity of hearing under CGST Act in Mohinder Kumar Vs. Pr. Commissioner case.
CESTAT ruled extended demand period unsustainable without proven intent to evade tax, setting aside Rs. 11 Cr excise duty demand on Kanoria Energy & Infrastructure.
Karnataka High Court confirms that a reasonable time limit applies to Section 201 orders for non-residents if no specific time limit is prescribed by law, dismissing the CIT appeal.
Delhi High Court restores GST registration appeal for Alufab Ores Pvt Ltd due to improper SCN and missed hearings, granting another chance to contest the cancellation.
ITAT Delhi restored Fiserv India’s appeal, citing CIT(A)’s failure to address adjournment requests. The case will be reconsidered for a fair hearing and review.
ITAT Ahmedabad confirms that fulfilling Section 148 requirements under the Income Tax Act eliminates the need for a separate notice under Section 143(2).
