Delhi High Court held that where controversy is anchored in company’s affairs and issue is one which NCLT/NCLAT is empowered to determine the matter in question, section 430 of Companies Act bars parallel civil suits and compels recourse to NCLAT/NCLAT.
Calcutta High Court held that GST Circular issued by Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs [CBIC] are binding on all the departmental officers but at the same time circular should not be treated as shield to ward off legal scrutiny and shelve legal action in cases involving undisclosed transaction, and/or dubious invoices and bills.
Madras High Court held that reassessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act after expiry of four years is sustainable in law since assessee has failed to set out truly and fully all the material facts.
CESTAT Delhi held that since DGFT [Directorate General of Foreign Trade] has issued EODC [Export obligation Discharge Certificate] under EPCG [Export Promotion Capital Goods] hence customs authority cannot initiate proceeding demanding duty/ imposing penalty.
The Tribunal held that approval by an incompetent authority under Section 151(ii) invalidates a reassessment issued after three years. The notice and consequential order were declared void for lack of jurisdiction.
ITAT ruled that deductions under section 80P cannot be disallowed at the CPC stage for returns filed after the due date prior to Finance Act 2021. The matter was remanded for proper verification by the AO.
ITAT ruled that enhancement of income under section 251 without giving the assessee a proper hearing is invalid. The appeals were remanded to CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
ITAT held that Section 50C proviso is retrospective, allowing stamp duty value as on the agreement date where consideration was fixed earlier, significantly reducing LTCG exposure.
The tribunal held that mere absence of substantial activities since inception is not conclusive where charitable objects are genuine. A fresh opportunity must be granted to substantiate activities with evidence.
The tribunal held that reassessment beyond three years is invalid when alleged escaped income is below Rs. 50 lakh. Notices issued contrary to section 149 after the 2021 amendments were quashed for lack of jurisdiction.
