The Court set aside the appellate order after finding no inquiry into when the March 2022 order was uploaded, directing the authority to verify the actual upload date. The ruling clarifies that limitation must be assessed based on proven upload timelines.
The High Court held that investigation material showed prima facie involvement in unlawful tender cost increases. The ruling emphasized that such allegations warrant a full trial, not discharge.
The Supreme Court dismissed the SLP filed by the Income Tax Department, condoning delay but emphasizing that repeated petitions on settled questions waste judicial resources.
The Tribunal held that purchases cannot be treated as bogus when books are accepted and payments are made through banking channels. The addition under section 69C was deleted due to lack of concrete evidence.
The Court rejected the anticipatory bail application as the applicant was absconding and implicated in a fraudulent lottery cybercrime. Bail was denied considering the nature of offences under IPC and IT Act.
The court held that the challenge to the 2021 GST demand order was filed after an unjustified four-year delay. The petition was dismissed as barred by laches.
The AO treated all commission and part of rent as bogus due to limited vouchers, no TDS, and identity gaps. The Tribunal found this approach inconsistent with the AO’s own initial proposal and disproportionate to the business realities of land-development. It concluded that only estimated disallowances of 20% commission and 50% rent were appropriate.
Tribunal held that delays caused by pandemic disruptions and internal management-auditor communication issues constitute reasonable cause under Section 274, deleting ₹2.42 lakh penalty.
The Court held that the petitioner challenged a 7A order without first using the statutory appeal under Section 7-I. The writ was dismissed as Article 226 cannot be invoked to circumvent prescribed remedies.
The Tribunal held that export duty must be based on the final invoice and BRC, rejecting reliance on CRCL moisture results. The case was remanded for fresh computation of refund and interest.
