The Tribunal examined demonetisation-period cash deposits and held that prior cash withdrawals supported by bank records could not be disregarded. The ruling clarifies that additions cannot rest on assumptions about personal conduct.
The Tribunal set aside the appellate order after finding that the appeal was not adjudicated on merits. The matter was remanded to ensure proper consideration after granting adequate opportunity of hearing.
The dispute concerned denial of exemption on the ground of alleged business activity. The Tribunal held that once registration under Section 12AA stood restored, exemption under Sections 11 and 12 could not be denied.
The High Court set aside a 10% TDS certificate issued without recording how the payments were taxable. The ruling stresses that Section 197 orders must be reasoned and cannot ignore binding precedents.
The Court rejected the revenue’s plea that the dealer caused delay in refund processing. Interest was held payable under Sections 38 and 42 of the DVAT Act.
The Court set aside the detention order and notice after finding they were not issued and communicated within the mandatory seven-day period under Section 129, rendering the action unsustainable.
The Court held that goods accompanied by valid documents cannot be detained under Section 129 merely due to alleged misclassification, leaving such issues to assessment proceedings.
Refusing to condone delay, the Court ruled that vague personal difficulties and incorrect assumptions about remedies do not meet the threshold of sufficient cause, leading to dismissal of the appeal.
The High Court set aside retrospective GST registration cancellation after finding that the show cause notice failed to specify the default period or dues, violating natural justice.
The decision limits tax exposure by holding that unexplained cash deposits during demonetization should be assessed on an estimated profit basis when business records are accepted.
