The CESTAT Mumbai allowed an appeal against customs duty reassessment, holding that reclassification of copper busbars for EOU imports exceeded authorities’ jurisdiction and violated notification provisions.
The Tribunal held that the extended period could not be invoked because the Department was already aware of the appellant’s activities. Service tax was upheld only for the normal period, and the matter was remanded for recalculation.
HC held that delayed appeals need not prevent GST Registration restoration when taxpayer undertakes to file returns and pay outstanding dues. Restoration was directed subject to completing statutory formalities.
ITAT Mumbai dismissed a tax appeal due to a 1,370-day delay, ruling that reliance on a tax consultant’s advice does not constitute sufficient cause for condonation. Case underscores strict adherence to limitation rules in tax proceedings.
The Court held that a Section 148 notice issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer instead of the Faceless Assessing Officer was invalid. It ruled that mandatory faceless procedures apply even in international taxation matters.
Madras High Court rejected petitioner’s limitation plea despite COVID-19 extensions and remanded case for fresh adjudication, subject to 50% pre-deposit of disputed GST.
The ITAT Mumbai held that Section 263 cannot be invoked when the Assessing Officer has taken a permissible view after inquiry. Revision order quashed, upholding reassessment.
Delhi High Court remands SCNs issued to a taxpayer for fresh adjudication, citing violation of natural justice. The petitioner is granted time to file replies and attend a personal hearing.
HC set aside a rectification rejection after finding that authority failed to provide a personal hearing. Matter was remanded for fresh consideration subject to a 25% tax deposit.
Gujarat High Court rules that reopening assessments using information from third parties without direct evidence linking the taxpayer is invalid, quashing Section 148 notices.
