The Court granted bail after noting that the principal material against the applicants consisted of confessional statements and statements of co-accused persons. Charge sheets had already been filed in the cases.
The Madras High Court set aside an ex-parte GST assessment against a second-hand mobile phone dealer who claimed taxation should apply only to the margin under Rule 32(5).
The Tribunal deleted the addition after finding that the taxpayer had furnished complete documentary evidence of purchase and sale of shares. The ruling emphasizes that suspicion, however strong, cannot replace legally admissible evidence.
ITAT Delhi held that reassessment based solely on Investigation Wing reports without independent enquiry is invalid. The ruling emphasizes that borrowed satisfaction cannot justify reopening under Section 147.
The Tribunal ruled that statements of builder group officials, without corroborative evidence against the purchaser, cannot form the sole basis for addition. The decision reinforces the principle that third-party statements must be independently verified.
The Court held that an Assessing Officer’s quasi-judicial decision cannot attract disciplinary action merely because another view was possible. Absence of mala fides or lack of integrity defeated the misconduct charge.
The Tribunal held that property investment funded through documented foreign remittances from the assessee’s husband could not be treated as unexplained. Bank records and remittance confirmations established the complete source of funds.
ITAT Mumbai held that additions under Sections 68 and 69C could not be sustained where the Revenue relied only on generalized investigation findings. The Tribunal found no evidence linking the assessee to any accommodation entry arrangement and deleted both additions.
The Tribunal upheld the deduction of interest expenditure after finding that the loan was utilized wholly for business activities. Once business use was established, the deduction could not be denied merely on technical grounds.
The Tribunal held that Section 43B cannot be invoked where the assessee has not claimed the GST liability as a deduction. Since the amount was not debited to the profit and loss account, the disallowance was deleted.
