The issue was attachment of a taxpayer’s bank account for another person’s dues without notice. The Court held such action invalid due to violation of natural justice and lack of prior liability determination.
The Tribunal held that loan repayment cannot be treated as unexplained cash credit under section 68. The addition was deleted as it was based on incorrect classification of repayment as fresh loan.
The issue was denial of credit due to post-amendment invoicing. The Tribunal held that credit is admissible since services were completed before the cut-off date.
**SEO Description:** Supreme Court holds that an appeal filed by a suspended director in the name of the corporate debtor after admission of CIRP is not maintainable. It rules that such a fundamentally incompetent appeal cannot be cured or converted after expiry of limitation under Section 61(2) of the IBC, and sets aside NCLAT’s contrary approach.
The Court condoned a 687-day delay in filing Form 10B, accepting the explanation of unintentional oversight in online filing. It held that denial of exemption due to such delay would be unjust, especially for a charitable trust.
The Tribunal examined whether an increase in loans was due to fresh borrowing or reclassification. It remanded the matter for verification, holding that no addition is warranted if no new funds were received.
Relying on binding precedent, the Court issued directions to resolve overlapping GST inquiries. It stressed adherence to structured coordination mechanisms between authorities.
The Court examined whether an FIR without prior sanction under GST law is sustainable. It allowed investigation but restrained arrest and barred filing of the charge sheet pending further hearing.
The Tribunal held that unsigned excel sheets without supporting evidence cannot justify additions. It ruled that absence of corroboration and cross-examination renders such documents unreliable.
The Tribunal held that mere classification of shares as penny stock is insufficient to deny LTCG exemption. In absence of evidence linking the assessee to manipulation, the addition under Section 69A was deleted.
