CAAR Mumbai ruled that customized metal chassis, covers, and heatsinks used in data center switches are classifiable under 8517 79 90 as parts of communication apparatus and eligible for Nil customs duty under Notification No. 57/2017-Customs.
Bombay High Court held that delay in filing of Form No. 10 was condoned since activities of trust are genuine and denial of benefit of accumulation u/s. 11(2) due to delay in Form No. 10 would cause genuine hardship.
The Karnataka High Court set aside the reassessment proceedings, including Section 148A and consequential penalty orders, ruling they were initiated without jurisdiction. The court found that the jurisdictional AO issued notices outside the scope of Section 151A, violating the CBDT’s faceless scheme.
The Karnataka High Court set aside the ex parte assessment, penalty, and demand orders passed under Sections 143(3) and 144B, accepting the taxpayer’s plea of bona fide non-appearance. The court adopted a justice-oriented approach, remitting the case back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh consideration from the show-cause notice stage.
The Karnataka High Court struck down an Income Tax attachment under Section 281B because the property was exclusively owned by a non-assessee petitioner who acquired it through valid transactions. The court ruled that tax recovery cannot attach property not belonging to the actual assessee, making the order illegal.
NCLT Kolkata held that application under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 for initiating Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against Haran Chandra Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd. [Corporate Debtor] is admitted since financial debt and default is duly established.
ITAT Bengaluru held that cancellation of charitable registration under Section 12AB(4) cannot operate retrospectively for years prior to AY 2022-23. The order of the PCIT (Central) cancelling the trust’s registration for earlier years was quashed as legally untenable.
NCLAT Delhi held that mediation family settlement upheld since entire sum as per consent terms duly received. Accordingly, the appeals are dismissed.
The Kolkata ITAT deleted a Rs.31 crore unexplained cash credit addition under Section 68 on the sale of shares, ruling the AO mechanically relied on an investigation report without fresh evidence. The tribunal held that investments accepted by the Department in previous years and confirmed via an NCLT merger cannot be summarily taxed upon sale.
The Kolkata ITAT quashed the Section 263 revision, confirming that the Assessing Officer (AO) had specifically examined and accepted the ICDS adjustments during scrutiny. The tribunal held that when the AO conducts due inquiry and takes a plausible view, the assessment is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the Revenue’s interest.
