The Telangana High Court held that Section 254(2) of the Income-tax Act is confined to rectifying mistakes apparent from the record and cannot be used to revisit the merits of an ITAT order.
The Telangana High Court granted interim protection against coercive GST recovery proceedings until the GST Appellate Tribunal becomes operational. The Court directed the taxpayer to deposit 10% of the disputed tax demand and pursue the second appeal before the Tribunal within the prescribed timeline.
The Telangana High Court permitted the taxpayer to withdraw the writ petition challenging a GST demand order and pursue the statutory appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act.
The Telangana High Court held that if a Sub-Registrar refuses registration, reasons must be recorded and communicated under Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908.
The Telangana High Court held that reassessment proceedings initiated under Sections 148A and 148 by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer after implementation of the faceless scheme were without jurisdiction. The Court quashed the notices while preserving the Revenue’s rights subject to the Supreme Court’s final decision.
The Telangana High Court permitted manual filing of a revocation application even after dismissal of a delayed appeal against GST registration cancellation. The ruling highlights that procedural delays and portal limitations should not deprive taxpayers of an opportunity to seek restoration of registration.
The Tribunal held that section 50 merely prescribes a special method for computing gains on depreciable assets and does not convert a long-term capital asset into a short-term capital asset. Consequently, long-term capital losses were permitted to be set off against such gains under section 74.
The ruling clarifies that consignment notes carry legal significance under the Finance Act and Service Tax Rules for determining GTA status. Without such documents, a transporter cannot be subjected to service tax as a Goods Transport Agency.
The Tribunal ruled that the guideline value recorded in a registered document is not conclusive for computing capital gains if the assessee proves that a higher amount was genuinely paid. The decision underscores the importance of substantive evidence over mere recitals in the sale deed.
The Rajasthan High Court held that an order restoring appeals through review proceedings is not separately appealable under the Benami Act. The Court ruled that Order 47 Rule 7 CPC barred such challenges.
