Tax Weekly Round-Up: October 27 - November 02, 2025

SUPREME COURTAutomobile Dealers Association Moves Supreme Court Over Compensation Cess Lapse After GST 2.0 Reforms, Claims Loss Of Rs.2500 CrCase Title: FEDERATION OF AUTOMOBILE DEALERS ASSOCIATION v. UNION OF INDIADiary No. 60671/2025The Federation of Automobile Dealers Association has moved the Supreme Court seeking relief related to compensation cess input tax credit worth Rs.2500 crores, which stands locked in dealers ledgers as a consequence of recent revision in the Goods and Services Tax (GST) framework.Briefly put, a notification issued on September 17 scrapped the compensation cess on motor vehicles. This was done, as per the FADA, "without providing any transitional or refund mechanism". Therefore, dealers' accumulated compensation cess lapsed on September 22 and may not be carried forward.HIGH COURTSBombay HCAO Cannot Rely Solely On Sales Tax Dept Data To Add Bogus Purchases Without Granting Cross-Examination: Bombay High CourtCase Title: Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Ramelex Private Ltd.Case Number: INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 14 OF 2022The Bombay High Court has held that the Assessing Officer (AO) cannot rely solely on Sales Tax Department Data for an income tax addition without granting cross-examination.Justices G.S. Kulkarni and Aarti Sathe stated that, "when the VAT assessment was pending adjudication, merely relying on the information of the Sales Tax Department without granting an opportunity to the Assessee to even cross-examine the hawala purchasers to confirm the purchases from them violated the basic facts of law amenating to unfairness and breach of the principles of natural justice in making the addition of Rs.2,05,74,750/- as bogus purchases in hands of the Assessee."Income Tax | Assessee Should Not Be Penalised For Delay In Filing Return Caused By CA's Belated Advice: Bombay High CourťCase Title: Balaji Landmarks LLP Eartwhile v. Central Board Of Direct Taxes (CBDT)Case Number: WRIT PETITION NO. 16638 OF 2024The Bombay High Court has held that the assessee should not be penalised for the delay in filing the return caused by the chartered accountant's belated advice. The bench noted that the delay is not due to any negligence on the part of the assessee, but to inadequate advice by the Chartered Accountant, a fact admitted by him in his affidavit.Justices B.P. Colabawalla and Amit S. Jamsandekar opined that the Petitioner ought not to be put to a considerable disadvantage as a result of belated advice given to it by the Chartered Accountant, especially when the issue that was being grappled with is fairly complex and for which there were no well-settled judicial precedents at the relevant time.Delhi HCUnregistered Firm Can Sue To Enforce Statutory Or Common Law Rights; S.69(2) Partnership Act No Bar: Delhi High CourtCase title: Amit Kumar Basau & Anr. v. Sales Tax Officer Class Ii Avato Ward 13 (Special Zone) Zone 12 Delhi & Ors.Case no.: W.P.(C) 15327/2025The Delhi High Court has held that Section 69(2) of the Partnership Act, 1932 is not an embargo to suits filed by unregistered firms, if any statutory or common law right is being sought to be enforced.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Shail Jain observed, “Section 69 of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 has an embargo on an un-registered firm from filing a suit or any proceeding for enforcement of a right. However, the exceptions to the said provision are carved out in Haldiram Bhujiawala & Anr. v. Anand Kumar Deepak Kumar & Anr. (2000).”Customs Housing Agent Can Be Made Liable For Wrongdoings Of Employees, Must Exercise Due Diligence: Delhi High CourtCase title: Nitco Logistics Pvt Ltd v. The Commissioner Of Customs Airport And GeneralCase no.: CUSAA 56/2024The Delhi High Court has made it clear that a Customs Housing Agent is responsible for the actions of its employees and it must exercise due diligence in supervising their activities.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Shail Jain further held that a CHA may be held accountable for the wrongdoings of its employee but, the punishment in that regard has to be proportionate.Income Tax Commissioner's Order For Reopening Assessment U/S 151 Income Tax Act Can Be In Words "Yes, I Am Convinced": Delhi High CourtCase title: Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax – 1 v. M/S Agroha Fincap Ltd.Case no.: ITA 60/2024The Delhi High Court has held that the Income Tax Commissioner's order granting sanction under Section 151 of the Income Tax Act 1961 for reopening assessment after four years of the relevant Assessment Year (AY) can be in the words— “Yes, I am convinced”.Section 151(1) of the Act categorically provides that no notice for reassessment shall be issued under Section 148 by the Assessing Officer (AO), after expiry of four years from the end of the relevant AY, unless the Commissioner is satisfied on the reasons recorded by the AO that it is a fit case for the issue of such notice.Renting/Leasing Residential Premises For Use As Residence Exempt From GST: Delhi ...

Tax Weekly Round-Up: October 27 - November 02, 2025

Kapil Dhyani

Tags