Delhi High Court sets aside Income Tax Officer’s order for Assessment Year 2016-17, citing failure to consider the taxpayer’s response. Read the full judgment here.
Delhi High Court’s judgment on transfer pricing case involving functional dissimilarity & amalgamation, leading to exclusion of certain comparables.
CESTAT Chandigarh remanded the matter to the Adjudicating Authority for a fresh re-consideration as cross-examination to key witnesses was not allowed.
Chhattisgarh High Court held that bail application filed u/s. 439 of Cr.P.C. rejected as the applicant is unable to satisfy twin conditions for the grant of bail under Section 45 of the PMLA, 2002.
Supreme Court held that any person summoned under Section 69 of the CGST Act, 2017 for the purpose of recording the statements cannot invoke Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The respondent should sought recourse by filing criminal application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Calcutta High Court’s ruling in Sushil Jaiswal Vs Union of India – order under Section 148A(d) set aside due to denial of personal hearing violating principles of natural justice.
ITAT Delhi held that issuance of notice u/s. 148 of the Act by the Income Tax Officer having no jurisdiction over the assessee and consequent assessment made u/s. 143(3) read with section 147 of the Act is void and bad in law.
CESTAT Delhi held that buying and selling space on ships does not amount to rendering a service and any profit or income earned through such transactions would not be leviable to service tax.
Gujarat High Court held that penalty not imposable as excess depreciation claimed was surrendered by the assessee without prior detection of the Revenue and such excess claim was made due to bonafide reasons.
CESTAT Chandigarh held that the interest of justice would be properly served if the case goes back to the Adjudicating Authority to adjudicate the case afresh as not allowing the cross-examination of key witnesses vitiates the proceedings.
