The Tribunal sent the issue of deduction for political donations back to the Assessing Officer after finding that bank transaction details had not been properly verified. Fresh adjudication was directed after giving the assessee an opportunity of hearing.
CESTAT held that operation and maintenance of drinking water plants for Nagar Nigams related to municipal water supply functions. The consideration received was therefore exempt under Entry 25 of Notification No. 25/2012-ST.
CESTAT Kolkata held that shortages of raw materials and finished goods cannot be established through mere eye estimation. The Tribunal consequently quashed excise demands, interest, and penalties based on alleged stock shortages.
The Tribunal held that AY 2010-11 was outside the permissible ten-year assessment block computable under Section 153A. Applying the Delhi High Court’s interpretation in Ojjus Medicare, it found the notice itself invalid. As a result, the assessment proceedings were quashed and the appeals were allowed.
The Tribunal held that donations qualifying under Section 80G do not become ineligible merely because they are incurred as part of CSR obligations. The deduction was allowed following earlier decisions in the assessee’s own case.
The Tribunal held that disallowance of 20% of total purchases was unsustainable where the Assessing Officer had accepted sales, stock records, and quantitative details. Mere non-service of notices under Section 133(6) could not justify treating all purchases as bogus.
ITAT found that the taxpayer’s foreign investment was funded through disclosed banking channels and tax-paid funds. Since there was no deliberate concealment, the penalty was deleted.
The High Court set aside the GST demand for fresh adjudication after finding that the authorities had not properly examined stock records, GSTR filings, and transitional credit claims before confirming the demand.
CESTAT Chandigarh held that various disputed services qualified as input services under Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The Tribunal ruled that services having a direct or indirect connection with manufacturing were eligible for Cenvat credit.
The Tribunal admitted the insolvency petition after finding sufficient evidence of a subsisting financial debt and default in repayment exceeding the statutory threshold under the IBC.
