The dispute concerned whether courts could revisit the validity of an arbitration clause after appointing an arbitrator. The Supreme Court held that once the Section 11 order became final under the pre-2015 regime, the issue could not be reopened.
Summons under Section 70 of the CGST Act was only a step in the process of inquiry. Mere issuance of summons could not be equated with arrest or initiation of recovery proceedings.
The tribunal held that interest earned on savings bank deposits is attributable to the business of providing credit to members. Such incidental bank interest qualifies for full deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i).
The issue was whether reassessment completed after a court stay complied with statutory timelines. The Tribunal held that limitation resumes from the date the stay is vacated, rendering the reassessment time-barred.
Supreme Court held Section 29A time can be extended even after a delayed arbitral award; late award is unenforceable, not void, and mandate extension remains permissible.
The case examined whether commission paid to overseas agents attracts TDS and disallowance. The Tribunal held that services rendered abroad are not chargeable to tax in India, nullifying Section 40(a)(i).
Supreme Court held High Courts cannot use Article 227 to strike off a plaint when CPC remedies exist; suit restored and defendants directed to pursue Order VII Rule 11 CPC.
The issue was whether reopening based only on portal information is valid. The Tribunal held that absence of independent inquiry and tangible material vitiates reassessment and nullifies the addition.
ITAT Surat held reassessment invalid where notice u/s 148, though dated 31-03-2021, was issued on 01-04-2021 without following s.148A procedure; entire reassessment quashed.
The dispute examined whether loan interest used to buy virtual digital assets could be deducted. The ruling held that such interest forms part of cost of acquisition and is allowable despite Section 115BBH restrictions.
