The SC refused to interfere where the High Court had quashed reassessment based on binding precedents. It held that no ground existed to reopen findings already settled by earlier rulings.
The Court quashed all notices and orders as the matter was identical to earlier decisions. It ruled that consistency with precedent requires setting aside such proceedings.
The Court held that ITC cannot be denied solely because supplier registrations were cancelled retrospectively. It ruled that absence of evidence of collusion requires fresh verification before denying credit.
The Court held that input tax credit can be claimed regardless of the month of purchase. It ruled that the amendment to Section 10(3) is clarificatory and applies retrospectively.
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) improperly admitted additional evidence without satisfying Rule 46A conditions or recording reasons. It emphasized that procedural compliance is mandatory and failure to follow it invalidates the relief granted.*
The High Court allowed a taxpayer to seek revocation of GST registration despite a time-barred appeal. It directed authorities to accept a manual application, emphasizing fairness over procedural delay.
The Tribunal held that penalty under Section 271(1)(c) cannot be imposed when additions are made on an estimated basis. It upheld deletion of penalty, emphasizing absence of concrete evidence of concealment.
The Tribunal clarified that filing of original return is not mandatory for claiming exemption under Section 54. It directed verification of conditions and allowed relief if eligibility is established.
The case examined whether a partnership can shield unlawful sub-letting. The Supreme Court held that where possession is effectively transferred to third parties, courts can lift the veil and treat it as sub-letting. The ruling reinforces that substance prevails over form in tenancy disputes.
The Tribunal held that additions based solely on third-party statements and Excel sheets are unsustainable without independent evidence. It emphasized that denial of cross-examination violates natural justice and invalidates the addition.
