Chhattisgarh High Court reiterated that if the AO’s view is legally permissible, even if it results in a lower tax liability, the revisional authority cannot invoke Section 263 simply because it disagrees with the AO’s approach.\nThe post Sec. 263 Cannot Be Invoked When AO Follows One of Two Possible Views: Chhattisgarh HC appeared first on TaxGuru.

Supreme Court rules that the Domestic Violence Act is applicable to all women in India, regardless of religion or social background, ensuring equal protection of rights.\nThe post Domestic Violence Act Applies to All Women, Irrespective of Religion or Social Background: SC appeared first on TaxGuru.

Assessee-company was engaged in the business of manufacturing and trading of Inverters & Batteries and had its factory premises in Himachal Pradesh. For running its operations, it had availed various facilities from financial creditors and also with SBI.\nThe post Legal proceedings could not be instituted by CGST Dept on property of Corporate Debtor if liquidated by NCLT appeared first on TaxGuru.

ITAT Jaipur held that mere entering into the Development Agreement would not permit invocation of section 45(2) of the Income Tax Act. There is no positive act which indicates that the assessee has treated capital asset as stock-in-trade.\nThe post Mere entering into development agreement doesn’t permit invocation of Section 45(2): ITAT Jaipur appeared first on TaxGuru.

During the course of search/survey operations, it was noticed that the assessee has paid labour charges to three concerns. Post investigation, AO came to the conclusion that the labour charges paid to the concerns were also not genuine.\nThe post Addition of non-genuine labour charges unjustified as genuineness proved: ITAT Mumbai appeared first on TaxGuru.

ITAT Bangalore held that rejection of exemption u/s. 11 of the Income Tax Act due to non-appearance of form 10B in e-filing portal unjustified as form was already filed but was not appearing in e-filing portal. Matter remanded for fresh consideration.\nThe post Rejection of exemption u/s. 11 unjustified as form 10B was filed but didn’t appeared in e-filing portal appeared first on TaxGuru.

ITAT Bangalore held that approval given under section 153D of the Income Tax Act at the fag end of assessment in a mechanical manner and without application of mind is invalid and bad in law.\nThe post Approval granted u/s. 153D in mechanical manner is bad-in-law: ITAT Bangalore appeared first on TaxGuru.

CESTAT Bangalore held that DLP data projectors having additional facility of video port are classifiable under CTH 8528 6100 and not under 8528 6900 and accordingly, benefit of notification no. 24/2005-Cus dated 01.03.2005 extended to its import.\nThe post Import benefit extended to DLP data projectors with video port as classified under CTH 8528 6100: CESTAT Bangalore appeared first on TaxGuru.

CESTAT Kolkata held that penalty u/s. 114 of the Customs Act imposable on customs broker and intermediary with regard to non-compliance of their duty of fulfilling KYC requirement. Accordingly, penalty reduced to INR 4 Lakhs.\nThe post Penalty u/s. 114 imposable on custom broker and intermediary for not fulfilling KYC requirement: CESTAT Kolkata appeared first on TaxGuru.

Madras High Court held that matter of mismatch of ITC between GSTR-3B and GSTR-1 remanded back for fresh consideration since non-appearance on the part of the assessee was due to the fact that accountant was not doing well.\nThe post Matter of mismatch of ITC between GSTR-3B and GSTR-1 remanded back: Madras HC appeared first on TaxGuru.