Sale Proceeds Of Minor's Property Share Deposited Under Court Order Excluded From Father's Taxable Income: ITAT

The Chennai Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has stated that sale proceeds of a minor's property share deposited under court order are excluded from father's taxable income. S.S. Viswanethra Ravi (Judicial Member) held that the assessee cannot decide the utilization of his minor daughter's share as it is deposited as per Court's order and it is impossible to club the same...

Tax Weekly Round-Up: September 08 - September 14, 2025

HIGH COURTSAllahabad HC[CGST Act] Tax Officers Expected To Know Law Laid Down By Higher Courts: Allahabad High CourtCase title: - M/S Rajdhani Udyog v. State Of U.P. And 2 OthersCase no.: WRIT TAX No. - 3684 of 2025While calling for personal affidavit from Principal Secretary, Institutional Finance, Government of U.P., Lucknow explaining the conduct of the tax officers in the State in...

[GST Rate-Cuts] Karnataka High Court Refuses Ex-Parte Stay On Guideline Mandating Revised MRP Stickers On Existing Stock

The Karnataka High Court on Monday refused to pass an ex-parte order staying the guideline dated September 9 issued by the Union of India mandating the declaration of revised retail sale price (MRP), on unsold stock manufactured/packed/imported, which would be effective from September 22, in addition to the existing retail sale price (MRP).Justice B M Shyam Prasad refused the ex parte...

Once Actual Movement Of Goods Proved By Assessee Remains Unrebutted, Proceedings U/S 74 GST Act Are Unjustified: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has recently held that when the actual movement of goods has been proved by the assesee and the same remains unrebutted by the authority, proceedings under Section 74 of Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 are unjustified. Proceedings under Section 74 of GST Act can be initiated if an assesee has not paid or short paid or erroneously refunded or input tax...

Surprise Searches Can Be Conducted On Family's Lockers U/S 132 Of Income Tax Act Over Suspicion Of Undisclosed Assets: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has upheld the surprise search and seizure conducted by the Income Tax Department at the private lockers maintained by a family at South Delhi Vaults, without issuance of prior notice or summons to them.The family claimed that failure to notify them was a flagrant violation of Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which relates to 'Search and seizure'.Section...

Delhi High Court Directs Customs Department To Set Up Passenger Grievance Counters At Delhi Airport

The Delhi High Court has asked the Commissioner of Customs at the IGI Airport to create some counters of the Department outside the airport's security zone, for easy access of aggrieved passengers.The direction was made by a division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Shail Jain after the Petitioner, a resident of Kuwait whose gold cut piece was seized by the Department, complained...

IGST Act | Party Providing Services Under Bipartite Agreement Cannot Be Labelled As “Intermediary”: Rajasthan High Court

While hearing a petition against the decision of Department of Revenue by a company providing services to a foreign entity, Rajasthan High Court held that for someone to be called an “intermediary”, there had be existence of 3 parties in the contract, in the absence of which, the services rendered under a bipartite agreement could not be called “intermediary”.The division bench of...

Incorrectly Declaring Indian Goods As 'Made In China' Contrary To Public Interest: Delhi High Court Denies Relief In Customs Case

The Delhi High Court has held that misleading consumers about locally manufactured goods by labelling them as 'Made in China' or in some other foreign country is contrary to public interest.The bench was dealing with a Customs case whereby Petitioner's goods (mobile tempered glass) bearing 'Made in China' mark were seized by the Department in a raid.The Department had allowed provisional...

Tax Liability Under JDA Arises Only Upon Conveyance Of Property, Not On Execution Of Agreement: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court held that tax liability under JDA (joint development agreement) arises only upon conveyance of property, not on execution of agreement. The bench consists of Justices Bharati Dangre and Nivedita P. Mehta stated that no liability actually fell upon the assessee at the time when JDA was entered into, as the liability arises only upon the conveyance of...

Right To Travel Abroad Can't Be Curtailed Solely On Grounds Of Pending Tax Prosecution: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has stated that facing tax prosecution does not automatically bar an accused from foreign travel. Justice S.M. Modak stated that, "It is true right to travel abroad is recognized as a fundamental right. Merely because a person is facing with prosecution, it does not mean that he cannot travel abroad till the time the investigation is under progress or criminal...

Employees' Contributions Must Be Paid By Due Date Under ESI/EPF Act, Not Income Tax Act: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that an employer can claim deduction of employees' contributions towards Provident Fund or Employer's State Insurance Fund, held by it in trust, only if it deposits these amounts on or before the statutory due date prescribed under the relevant labour law.Section 36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act, 196 pertains to employees' contribution. It stipulates that...

Refund Can't Be Rejected On Grounds Of Classification Once Tax Liability Is Settled: CESTAT

The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that refund cannot be rejected on grounds of classification once tax liability is settled. Dr. Rachna Gupta (Judicial Member) and R. Priya (Technical Member) stated that refund under Section 11B of Central Excise Act read with Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994, is permissible subject to...