CESTAT Mumbai imposed penalty on customs broker for failure in not being proactive in fulfilling their obligation by failing to bring to the notice of the Customs department about the non-compliances in export transactions.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that once the Income Tax Settlement Commission has passed final order u/s. 245D of the Income Tax Act, AO has no jurisdiction to reopen the same u/s. 148 of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Delhi held that addition under section 68 of the Income Tax Act towards sale of shares by the assessee unsustainable as such transaction cannot be alleged as unexplained/ bogus when department has not disputed investment in shares.
Madras High Court quashes an assessment order in a GST case, emphasizing the importance of serving proper notice and adhering to principles of natural justice.
Jharkhand High Court held that Jharkhand Value Added Tax Act, 2005 [JVAT Act] doesn’t have any provision for initiation of re-assessment proceedings against a re-assessment order. In case assessing authority is allowed to initiate repeated re-assessment proceeding merely on dictate of audit party there would be no finality of assessment.
Revenue had placed no material on record to show that the loose papers were in the hand-writing of assessee and there was no corroborative material on record to prove that the expenditure recorded in the said loose papers was incurred by assessee. Therefore, no addition could be made on account of undisclosed expenses.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that rejection of books of accounts merely for not providing stock details in desired format and without bringing any corroborative material on record suggesting specific defect in the books of accounts is unjustified.
ITAT Jodhpur held that levy of late fees under section 234E of the Income Tax Act is effective only from 01.06.2015. Accordingly, levy of late fees for F.Y. 2012-2013 is unsustainable in law.
CESTAT Mumbai held that ‘interface card’ is classifiable under customs tariff it 8517 7010 and not under customs tariff item 8517 6290. Accordingly, demand of differential duty set aside.
Supreme Court restores Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) appeal due to delay in Communication of CIT(A)’s order, granting opportunity for merit consideration.
