Category: Judgments
GST order quashed for not considering the reply filed and not providing an opportunity of personal hearing before passing the order. In a recent judgment, Karnataka High Court quashed and set aside GST order passed without considering the reply filed and not providing an opportunity of personal hearing …
Exemption from excise duty does not fall in the definition of income as envisaged under Section 2(24)(xviii) of the Income Tax Act. In a recent judgment, Hon’ble High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that exemption from excise duty does not fall in the definition of …
Rent receivable towards properties inherited from grandparents under will does not represent revenue receipt In a recent judgment ITAT Cochin has quashed rectification order under section 154 making addition towards rent receivable towards properties inherited by assessee from grandparents under will. ABCAUS Case Law Citation:4511 (2025) (04) abcaus.in …
AO not being an expert of accounts, having regard to complexity of business of the assesse was duty bound to invoke & direct a special audit u/s 142(2A) of the Act. In a recent judgment ITAT Panji has set aside assessment making ad hoc estimation of gross profits …
Seller is not responsible for verification of Form 27C for obtaining goods without Collection of Tax at Source if it is duly filed in and signed by the declarant and forwarded within the prescribed time limit In a recent judgment, the Hon’ble Jharkhand High Court has declined to …
TCS provisions are not applicable to timber being sized, sawn into logs of different dimensions and shapes in activities carried on saw mills authorised by the Government. In a recent order, the Hon’ble Supreme Court dismissed the SLP of the Income Tax Department against the judgment of the …
Addition deleted for contingent liability stated in tax audit report but which was not debited to the P&L Account In a recent judgment, ITAT Kolkata upheld the order of CIT(A) deleting the addition made by CPC for contingent liability stated in tax audit report but which was not …
Mere failure of partner to respond to notice u/s 133(6) does not ipso facto establish that the capital is unexplained – ITAT upheld deletion of addition u/s 68 In recent case, ITAT Ahmedabad has upheld that the failure of the partner to respond to a notice under section …
Why cannot be the date of submission of reply and the date of personal hearing be the same, we are not aware of any such law – Allahabad High Court In a recent judgment, Hon’ble Allahabad High Court has dismissed the Petition of the assessee against the GST …
Even if no response is filed by assessee to notices u/s 61 and 73 of GST Act, it was incumbent on the Department to pass an order in compliance of provisions of Section 75(6) of the Act In a recent judgment, Hon’ble Allahabad High Court quashed order passed …
