GSTAT held that the retailer failed to pass on the benefit of GST reduction from 28% to 18% through commensurate price cuts. The Tribunal directed deposit of ₹13.61 crore in Consumer Welfare Funds.
The dispute centred on whether the airport taxi operator had exclusive control over transportation services. The Commission relied on the licence agreement’s non-exclusivity clause and found no prima facie abuse of dominant position.
ITAT Mumbai held that an addition under Section 69 could not be sustained merely on the basis of statements recorded from representatives of the builder group. In the absence of incriminating material directly linking the assessee to the alleged cash payment, the addition of ₹31 lakh was deleted.
The Tribunal held that a medicine containing Ergotamine was merely a preparation and not “Ergotamine and its salts” under Schedule-B of the NDPS Order. As no NOC was required, the penalty imposed on the Customs Broker was quashed.
The Gauhati High Court held that a taxpayer whose GST registration was cancelled for non-filing of returns could seek restoration by complying with Rule 22(4) of the CGST Rules. The Court directed the authorities to consider the application upon payment of dues.
The case involved disallowances of business and labour expenses despite accepted books of account. The Supreme Court declined to interfere with the findings deleting the additions.
The Delhi High Court upheld the ITAT’s deletion of expense disallowances, noting that the books of account had not been rejected. The ruling highlights that ad hoc disallowances require stronger justification.
ITAT Delhi held that the assessees could not substantiate the genuineness of the share transactions underlying the LTCG claims. The additions under Section 68 were sustained after the Tribunal found that the evidence supported the Revenue’s conclusion of accommodation entries.
ITAT Bangalore allowed withdrawal of the appeal after the assessee opted to settle the dispute under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. The issue regarding LTCG being treated as business income was not decided on merits.
The Supreme Court issued notice in a challenge to West Bengals entry tax regime concerning goods meant for export. Interim protection was granted while the Court considers the constitutional issues involved.
