In Murliwala Agrotech Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India, the High Court reiterated that the right to an opportunity of hearing is essential before an IT case transfer, emphasizing that completed group assessments negated the Revenue’s stated reason for transferring the assessee’s file.
ITAT Kolkata rules that additions under Section 153A cannot be made without incriminating material, citing the Supreme Court’s Abhisar Buildwell judgment.
Allahabad High Court holds that sums paid under protest can count toward mandatory 10% pre-deposit under Section 107(6) of GST Act; remands matter for appeal hearing.
Tribunal confirms that notices under section 148 post-March 2022 must be issued by Faceless Assessing Officers, rendering JAO-issued notices void.
The Revenue argued that interest income from an Associated Enterprise (AE) should be taxed at the Maximum Marginal Rate MMR by invoking Article 12(6) of the DTAA} (PE exclusion). The Tribunal upheld the 15% DTAA rate, confirming that since the assessee has no PE in India, the exclusionary clause 12(6) does not apply, and the interest is a debt-claim under Article 12(4).
The Court held that refund delays due to system errors cannot deny exporters interest under Section 56 of the GST Act, directing payment within 12 weeks.
Tribunal held that a reassessment notice issued beyond the surviving limitation period and without sanction from the Principal Chief Commissioner was invalid, following the Supreme Court’s rulings in Ashish Agarwal and Rajeev Bansal.
Delhi High Court quashes reassessment for AY 2016-17 in Kusum Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. vs DCIT, holding sanction by PCIT invalid under Section 151 of the Income Tax Act.
The Supreme Court restored the ITAT’s order, ruling that a temporary lull in business due to the absence of a contract does not constitute cessation if the intention and efforts to continue (like correspondence and bidding) exist. The decision allows the non-resident company to claim business expenditure under Section 37(1) and set-off unabsorbed depreciation under Section 32(2).
ITAT Chennai held that reassessment notice issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer post Faceless Assessment instead of National Faceless Assessment Centre is void and invalid. Accordingly, appeal is allowed.
