The case involved simultaneous proceedings by Central and State GST authorities concerning the same tax period and subject matter. The High Court directed both authorities to coordinate and ensure that only one authority continues adjudication in accordance with the Supreme Court’s ruling.
The Delhi High Court held that GST registration could not be cancelled retrospectively when the show cause notice did not indicate such action. The order was quashed as it travelled beyond the scope of the notice.
The ITAT held that reassessment cannot be sustained when the Assessing Officer merely relies on an Investigation Wing report without independent verification. The reassessment order was quashed due to lack of independent application of mind.
Allahabad High Court held that share capital additions under Section 68 cannot be sustained merely on doubts about the investor’s source of funds. In the absence of evidence showing that the money originated from the assessee and was routed back, the addition was unsustainable.
Periodic or annual fees paid to a sports governing body to sustain annual league participation rights qualify as operational revenue expenses, not capital investments. Hospitality, travel, and boarding expenses incurred on celebrities and VIPs were fully deductible if they were used strategically to amplify brand visibility, ticket distribution, and corporate sponsorships.
The CCPA held that failure to disclose that many successful candidates attended only a free Interview Guidance Programme amounted to misleading advertising. The key takeaway is that coaching institutes must clearly disclose the nature of courses attended by successful students.
The Tribunal held that once immunity under Section 270AA was granted and the assessee accepted the assessment without appeal, the Assessing Officer could not later alter the assessment through Section 154 rectification. The ruling reinforces the finality and certainty intended by the immunity scheme.
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 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 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.
