AI-curated court updates, legal developments, and practice-area insights for Indian legal professionals.
The CESTAT in Bangalore annulled an IGST demand, ruling the extended limitation period under section 28(4) of the Customs Act was improperly applied due to lack of suppression or intent to evade duty.
The government has raised customs duties on precious metals, including gold, silver, and platinum, following amendments to previous notifications. This marks a significant adjustment in the customs duty landscape for the sector.
The ITAT Chennai has restored an assessment matter for an assessee pending a condonation petition under Section 119(2)(b), asserting its relevance to Section 80P deduction eligibility.
The ITAT Kolkata adjusted the profit estimation on undisclosed turnover, reducing it to 2.5% from 8%, while maintaining that suppressed turnover led to certain savings.
The ITAT Delhi ruled that findings from a 2005 survey on liaison offices cannot be mechanically applied to assess taxability for a later branch office structure, directing a fresh examination of the actual functions.
The Tribunal found the order of the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) to be cryptic, lacking a proper analysis of business activities between the assessee and comparables. It directed a fresh examination of comparability and the Arm's Length Price (ALP) computation.
The ITAT has clarified that notional rental income from shared office premises cannot be taxed without evidence of actual receipt.
The ITAT ruled that missing PAN details for donors do not justify treating nominal donations as non-voluntary contributions, allowing for final Section 12AB registration.
The ITAT determined that share premium received from verified investors cannot be treated as bogus cash credit, thus deleting a ₹45 lakh addition.
The ITAT upheld the addition of ₹7.5 crore under Section 69A, citing the assessee's failure to satisfactorily explain the source of the seized cash.
The CESTAT quashed the absolute confiscation of a gold biscuit, ruling that foreign markings alone do not prove gold smuggling without additional evidence.
The ITAT upheld an addition under Section 69A concerning ₹7.5 crore seized cash that was not satisfactorily explained by the assessee.
The ITAT has ruled that penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) must await the resolution of the corresponding quantum appeal.