Gauhati High Court held that writ petition is not maintainable due to availability of alternative efficacious remedy under the provisions of Section 85 of the Finance Act, 1994 before appellate authority. Accordingly, writ petition dismissed.
Jaipur Tribunal observed that the son had no independent income, and the purchase was made solely from the assessee’s funds. Consequently, restriction of exemption to 50% by the CIT(A) was set aside, confirming full Section 54F relief.
ITAT Jaipur held that withdrawing approval under section 10(23C)(vi) of the Income Tax Act not justified in absence of any corroborative evidence of personal benefit of trustees and misuse of funds. Accordingly, appeal allowed and registration u/s. 10(23C)(vi) restored.
Bombay High Court held that registration of vehicle in the name of innocent purchaser cannot be cancelled solely on the basis that initial registration was obtained by making false representation on the basis of forged documents.
ITAT Chennai held that issuing a notice under Section 148A(b) with only one day to respond violates the statutory minimum of seven clear days. All consequential proceedings, including the 148 notice and reassessment, were quashed as non-est, while substantive additions were left open as academic.
NCLAT Delhi held that acknowledgment of liability by Corporate Debtor in its balance sheets constitutes valid acknowledgement for both borrower and guarantor. Accordingly, the present appeal is allowed.
The Tribunal highlighted that non-receipt of assessment notice and lack of knowledge about tax procedures justified the 175-day delay. The appeal was restored to the AO, ensuring the assessee is given proper opportunity to present his case.
ITAT Amritsar ruled that accepting demonetised currency beyond the permitted date does not ipso facto create unexplained income under Section 69A. The assessee’s cash sales were already included in gross turnover, so no further addition was justified.
Orissa High Court held that filing of writ petition challenging adjudication order under section 73 of the GST Act after inordinate delay of around one year with adequate reasoning for inordinate delay cannot be entertained. Accordingly, writ petition is dismissed.
The Tribunal set aside the prior order as the deceased assessee could not represent himself and legal heirs were not on record. CIT(A) is directed to consider all issues afresh, including denial of indexed cost and 54F exemption.
