The Madras High Court held that failure to file the annual return in Form GSTR-9 attracts late fee under Section 47(2) of the CGST Act. It further ruled that penalty under Section 125 is permissible where no separate penalty is prescribed for such default.
The Kerala High Court condoned a 676-day delay in filing an ITAT appeal after finding that the assessee had bona fide relied on its auditors to file the appeal. The Court held that specific and plausible explanations indicating absence of deliberate inaction justified a liberal approach in the interest of justice.
The key issue was whether the absence of corresponding entries in Form 26AS justified denial of TDS credit. The ITAT held that employees should not suffer adverse consequences due to the employer’s failure to comply with TDS obligations.
The Tribunal examined whether an incorrect statement of financial transactions filed by a bank could lead to reassessment and addition in the wrong person’s hands. It ruled that admitted reporting errors must be rectified and cannot form the sole basis for taxation.
The Gauhati High Court held that partners who retained benefits from GST violations and acted behind such transactions can be penalized under Section 122(1A). The ruling clarifies that liability extends beyond the taxable entity in appropriate cases.
The Telangana High Court held that recovery proceedings under Section 226(3) cannot automatically extend to a daughter’s bank account merely because she is related to the assessee.
The Court held that denial of input tax credit cannot be justified solely because the selling dealer failed to deposit tax, where the purchasing dealer acted bona fide and complied with statutory requirements.
The Tribunal held that a 12.5% disallowance could not be sustained when the Assessing Officer neither rejected the books of account nor disputed the sales. The key takeaway is that additions must be supported by proper findings and evidence.
The Tribunal found that none of the purchasers examined by the Department had admitted making cash payments to the assessee. In the absence of statements, receipts, diaries, or other incriminating material, the allegation of on-money remained unsubstantiated. The addition based on presumptions was therefore set aside.
The ITAT held that Section 56(2)(viib) cannot apply where equity shares are issued upon conversion of CCDs without receipt of fresh consideration during the relevant year. The ruling emphasizes that the provision is triggered only upon actual receipt of share consideration.
