The Tribunal held that for a guarantee payable on demand, limitation begins from the date the guarantee is invoked and not from the NPA date. Since the guarantee was invoked in 2025, the Section 7 petition was held to be within limitation.
CESTAT Bangalore held that excavation, extraction, grading, and sorting of iron ore are mining-related activities taxable only under Mining Services from 01.06.2007. The Tribunal ruled that such activities could not be taxed under Business Auxiliary Service for the earlier period.
CESTAT Delhi held that proportionate reversal of Cenvat credit attributable to inputs and input services used for generating exempted electricity is sufficient compliance with Rule 6(3)(i). The Tribunal therefore set aside the demand and penalty.
The ITAT Jaipur held that deduction under Section 54F cannot be denied merely due to delay in completing construction when the assessee had substantially constructed a habitable residential house within the prescribed period. The Tribunal directed deletion of the addition.
The Authority found that a pre-selected donation mechanism added charges unless consumers actively opted out, impairing informed choice and constituting an unfair trade practice.
CCPA held that a subscription renewal interface using the phrase Accept Risk amounted to multiple prohibited dark patterns, including confirm shaming and forced action. A penalty was imposed despite subsequent modifications to the interface.
CESTAT Kolkata held that CENVAT credit on items such as MS Angles, Beams, Channels, and Plates is admissible where they are essential for manufacturing final products. The denial order was set aside.
The Tribunal held that service tax cannot be demanded again when the service provider has already collected and deposited the tax. The balance sponsorship service tax demand was therefore quashed.
The Tribunal held that modular kitchen baskets, racks, and similar products retain their identity as household articles and cannot be classified as parts of furniture merely because they are fixed in cabinets or drawers. The customs demand based on classification under Chapter 94 was set aside.
The Tribunal held that generalized investigation reports cannot substitute for concrete evidence against an assessee. Since the transactions were supported by documents and no direct evidence of undisclosed income existed, the addition was deleted.
