Delhi High Court Orders Customs To Release Traveller's Gold Worth ₹20 Lakh, Iphone, Playstation & More Over Failure To Issue SCN

The Delhi High Court recently ordered the Customs authorities to release a traveller's gold worth over ₹14 lakh and other branded articles like iPhone, PlayStation, etc. over the authority's failure to issue him a show cause notice.Section 124 of the Customs Act, 1962 contemplates issuance of a show cause notice before confiscation of goods.The Petitioner had landed at Delhi...

GST Registration Cannot Be Refused Merely Because Assessee Belongs To Another State: Andhra Pradesh High Court

The Andhra Pradesh High Court stated that GST registration can't be refused merely because the assessee belongs to another State. “Though the apprehension of the respondents may not be misplaced, it would not mean that registration can be refused on a ground, which is not available under the Statute or the Rules. There do not appear to be any restriction for persons outside the...

Income Tax Act | No Penalty Under S.271AAA If Undisclosed Income Is Admitted, Explained & Tax Paid Even With Delay : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court, while determining a tax matter, observed that the undisclosed income, under Section 271AAA(1) of the Income Tax Act, surrendered by the assessee during the search, is not sufficient to levy the penalty. Essentially, the said provision talks about penalty where a search has been initiated. The explanation reads as: “(a) “Undisclosed income” means—...

High Court Within Whose Jurisdiction AO Passes Assessment Order Has Jurisdiction To Entertain Appeal U/S 260A Income Tax Act: Delhi HC

The Delhi High Court has reiterated that only such High Court within whose jurisdiction the Assessing Officer passing an impugned assessment order is situated would have the jurisdiction to entertain an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.The Section makes provision for an appeal to the High Court from an order passed in appeal by the Appellate Tribunal.In the case at hand,...

Transfer Pricing | Resolution Under Mutual Agreement Procedure Is By Consensus, Cannot Be Imposed Upon Assessee: Delhi HC

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that a dispute with respect to arm's length price in a transfer pricing can be resolved under Mutual Agreement Procedure (MAP) only by consent and negotiations between contracting parties.A division bench of Justices Vibhu Bakhru and Swarana Kanta Sharma observed that such a resolution cannot be imposed in a contested case, where there is no...

'Every Statute Prima Facie Prospective Unless Stated Otherwise' : Supreme Court Says 2002 Amendment To CST Act Won't Affect Accrued Rights

The Supreme Court yesterday (on February 12) held that though after the amendment of Section 8(5) of the Central Sales Tax Act, the State Government's right to grant exemption from tax has ceased to exist, the amendment is prospective. Thus, it would not apply to the cases where an absolute exemption has already been granted.The amended Act nowhere stipulates that rights previously accrued...

New Income Tax Bill 2025: Concept Of "Tax Year" To Be Introduced Instead Of "Assessment Year", "Financial Year" To Remain Unchanged

The new Income Tax bill is set to introduce the concept of 'Tax Year'. This will replace the current concept of assessment year (or previous year) from the Income Tax Act. The "tax year" has been defined as follows:3. (1) For the purposes of this Act, “tax year” means the twelve months period of the financial year commencing on the 1st April.(2) In the case of a business or profession...

Andhra Pradesh VAT Act | Pleadings On Suppression Of Material Facts, Wilful Evasion Of Tax Are Sine Qua Non For Invoking S.21(5): High Court

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that pleadings relating to suppression of material facts, in an assessment order are the sine qua non for invoking section 21(5); by way of which limitation for filing an assessment order is extended to 6 years from 4 years. "There is nowhere any mention of suppression of facts, much less, wilful suppression of facts, resulting in wilful evasion...

AO Duty Bound To Dispose Of Assessee's Written Objections To Proposed Re-Assessment By Passing Speaking Order: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court recently upheld an ITAT order deleting the addition of over ₹4 crore made to the income of an assessee under the Income Tax Act, 1961 in reassessment action.A division bench of Chief Justice TS Sivagnanam and Justice Bivas Pattanayak held that the Assessing Officer had erred in not disposing of the written objection submitted by the assessee against the reopening of...

Short Tax | Timeline For Issuing Show Cause Notice U/S 73(2) Is Mandatory, Not Discretionary: Andhra Pradesh High Court

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that the time permit set out under 73(2) of the AP GST Act for issuance of show cause notice in relation to alleged short payment of tax, etc. is mandatory in nature.A division bench of Justices R Raghunandan Rao and Harinath N. added that any violation of that time period cannot be condoned and would render the show cause notice otiose.It observed,...

S.107 CGST Act Prescribes Independent Regime Of Limitation For Filing Appeals, Application Of S.5 Limitation Act Stands Excluded: Delhi HC

The Delhi High Court has held that since Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 prescribes an “independent regime” to determine the limitation period for filing statutory appeals, the provision for condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act stands excluded.A division bench of Justices Yashwant Varma and Dharmesh Sharma observed, “The facility to...

No Unfettered Right To Cross-Examine Person Making Statements U/S 138(B) Customs Act: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that a person facing charges under the Customs Act, 1962 does not have an unfettered right under Section 138B, to cross-examine the informant or person making incriminatory statements.Section 138(B) of the Customs Act of 1962 deals with the admissibility of statements made during customs proceedings.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and...