AI-curated court updates, legal developments, and practice-area insights for Indian legal professionals.
The ITAT ruled that properties purchased separately cannot qualify for Section 54F income tax exemptions despite being subsequently amalgamated.
The Income Tax Department has introduced a new feature that allows taxpayers to access and manage their foreign assets. Taxpayers can now download, verify, and correct overseas financial data through the AIS Compliance Portal.
The DGFT has amended the Handbook of Procedure 2023 to introduce Tariff Rate Quotas (TRQ) for imports of dates and marble under the India-Oman Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement. Applications for TRQ authorisations must be filed online, subject to customs notifications.
CAAR Delhi declined an advance ruling on roasted areca nut classification since the matter had been adjudicated by the Madras HC under Section 28I.
CESTAT upheld the confiscation of 26 gold biscuits lacking purchase proof but allowed the release of gold ornaments, a gold bar, and ₹1.88 crore cash.
The Bombay High Court has annulled a Section 148 notice against Indian Express Commercial Ventures for being issued post the statutory timeline, reinforcing the legal limitations on reassessment notices.
Reliance Jio has won a Cenvat credit case in the Bombay High Court following the withdrawal of revenue department's appeal, entitling the company to a refund of ₹253.3 crores. The case aligns with the Supreme Court’s precedent set in the Bharti Airtel case.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has directed verification of eligibility for a government-approved VRS compensation, determining it exempt under Section 10(10B) of the Income Tax Act.
The Gujarat High Court has quashed a Section 148 notice, determining that the seized broker register entry did not establish a live nexus with the petitioner. This ruling emphasizes the necessity for a clear link in tax assessments.
The ITAT Delhi has restored an addition under Section 44ADA for re-examination after finding that correct GSTR figures and supporting evidence had not been considered initially. This sharpens the focus on accurate reporting.
The ITAT Bangalore ruled that gross profit cannot be estimated merely by averaging previous years' figures without rejecting the books of account. This ruling underscores the necessity of proper justification for gross profit assessments.
The Madras High Court ruled that legal heirs can be held responsible for tax dues of a deceased GST taxpayer, remanding the assessment for compliance with conditions.
The Andhra Pradesh High Court invalidated an unsigned GST assessment order, ruling that the absence of the assessing officer's signature renders the order void.