The Court held that the deceased’s income had been wrongly computed at ₹84,000 and reassessed it at ₹1,00,000 based on available evidence. The ruling increased the compensation and reaffirmed principles for fair assessment in motor accident claims.
Gujarat High Court held that the refund of unutilised Input Tax Credit of Compensation Cess is admissible even if the goods are exported on payment of Integrated Goods and Services Tax [IGST]. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and refund is granted.
The Tribunal held that the appeal should be heard on merits after the CIT(A) dismissed it solely for a 45-day delay. It restored the matter for fresh adjudication, directing that the delay issue not be reconsidered.
Delhi High Court held that invocation of the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution unwarranted since efficacious alternative remedies under DRT and NCLT. Accordingly, writ petition is misconceived.
The Tribunal remanded the sustained cash deposit addition after accepting additional evidence. It directed the CIT(A) to reconsider the ₹7.02 lakh addition through de novo adjudication.
NCLAT Delhi held that that Provisional Attachment Order has to be treated to cease by virtue of legislative scheme under Section 32A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code and there is no necessity to obtain any order by the SRA from the adjudicating authority under the PMLA.
Himachal Pradesh High Court held that bail application is liable to be dismissed since twin conditions laid down in section 37 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS) not satisfied. Accordingly, petition dismissed.
The Tribunal held that the AO’s rejection of books under Section 145(3) was unsustainable as no specific defects were identified. The ruling confirms that estimation of income cannot be based on assumptions when records are supported by documentation.
The Tribunal ruled that Section 263 jurisdiction is barred under Explanation 1(c) if the matter is under appeal before CIT(A). AO’s assessment, including enquiry into statements and ledgers, was found proper. PCIT’s revision attempting to tax full Rs.1.59 Cr as bogus purchase was quashed.
The Tribunal held that the Section 148 notice issued by the jurisdictional officer instead of the faceless authority violated Section 151A. With the notice invalid, the reassessment and jewellery addition were quashed.
