ITAT ruled that the appeal dismissal by the CIT(A) without adjudicating merits violated natural justice. The Tribunal directed a fresh review, emphasizing that taxing gross receipts without allowing legitimate expenditure is not in accordance with law.
ITAT found authorities erred by upholding CPC’s denial of exemption solely because assessee filed ITR-7 instead of ITR-5. Ruling emphasizes that denying a just claim over procedural non-compliance causes undue hardship to taxpayer.
Delhi High Court held that 3621 days of delay in filing of an application for impleadment as legal heir allowed since matter came to the knowledge of legal heir only after the same was listed after nearly thirteen years. Accordingly, since reasonable and bonafide explanation provided, the delay in filing of impleadment application condoned.
ITAT allowed taxpayer’s appeal, holding AO erred by applying Section 50C to cash compensation received for extinguishment of a right to receive flats instead of an actual transfer of immovable property. The order directs deletion of confirmed LTCG addition of Rs. 80.32 lakhs.
ITAT Mumbai held that, in terms of section 194A(3)(v) of the Income Tax Act, co-operative society is not liable to deduction TDS on interest paid or credited on deposits to members before 1st June 2015. Accordingly, order set aside and appeal allowed to that extent.
The Madras High Court quashed an order levying 1% GST on a corporate guarantee furnished to a related party, ruling that the assessing officer failed to consider two relevant CBIC Circulars. The court remanded the matter back to the State Tax Officer for a fresh determination after considering the petitioner’s defense, which relied on the recipient being eligible for full Input Tax Credit.
CESTAT Chennai held that ‘wheel loaders’ are classifiable as ‘front-end shovel loaders’ and hence are covered under Customs Tariff Heading 8429 5100. However, demand for only normal period is sustained and demand for extended period is set aside.
ITAT Delhi deleted a ₹45.69 lakh disallowance made by CPC under Section 43B for unpaid GST/Service Tax. Tribunal held disallowance was invalid because assessee had not claimed taxes as an expenditure in Profit and Loss Account.
Orissa High Court dismissed Commissioner of Customs’ appeal under Section 130 of Customs Act, holding that no substantial question of law arose as Tribunal had rightly found respondent had discharged burden under Section 123 by proving legal ownership of seized gold biscuits.
Where the Commissioner of Customs issued a Public Notice directing Container Freight Stations (CFSs) not to collect GST on auction sales of uncleared cargo under Section 48 of the Customs Act, 1962, such notice was without jurisdiction, as the levy of GST was governed by the CGST Act and not by the Customs authorities.
