ITAT Delhi held that reassessment order u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act against a non-existent entity is bad in law and vitiated & nullity.
Read the NCLT judgment/order in the case of Anup Kumar Singh Vs Bank of India, where the Resolution Plan of Indu Projects Limited has been approved. Get insights into the application, facts, and compliance of the plan.
In a significant judgement by the Madhya Pradesh High Court, the rights of taxpayers to claim input tax credit under the GST system were reinforced. In the case of Agrawal And Brothers vs Union Of India, the court ruled that the taxpayer should not suffer due to a supplier’s error in GST reporting.
The reassessment notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, concerning the information of alleged bogus political donations, has been challenged on the grounds of exceeding the limitation period. The High Court has instructed the Assessing Officer (AO) to refrain from passing the assessment order.
In a recent judgment, the Hon’ble Bombay High Court granted the prayer of an assessee in GST proceedings to have their advocate present at a visible but not audible distance during interrogation. Learn more about the court’s decision and its implications.
ITAT Delhi held that addition made by the A.O. in the absence of any incriminating material found during the search operation conducted u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act is liable to be deleted.
ITAT Mumbai held that reasonable amount of addition should be made in case of bogus purchase. Accordingly, CIT(A) has justifiably made addition on the reasonable estimate basis @ 5% of the bogus purchase.
ITAT Delhi held that reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act unjustified in absence of failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all the material facts.
CESTAT Delhi held that maintenance charges towards the maintenance of documents and towards the security of documents by keeping the same at the premises of the appellants is rendering of service of ‘Maintenance, Management or Repair Service’ and hence demand confirmed.
ITAT Delhi held that penalty u/s 271D of the Income Tax Act is without any satisfaction and, therefore, no such penalty can be levied. Accordingly, penalty u/s 271D quashed.
