The Tribunal observed that the cooperative society’s members relied entirely on their CA, who failed to represent them in ex-parte assessments. In the interest of justice, the quantum additions were ...

Tribunal held that CIT(A) erred in rejecting the appeal despite Supreme Court–mandated limitation extensions. COVID-19–related delays must be liberally condoned when reasonable cause is ...

Explains how exporting electricity to the grid becomes a taxable “barter” event, making electricity an exempt supply and triggering proportional ITC reversal under Section ...

The Tribunal condoned the delay and held that the appeal could not be dismissed in limine. CIT(A) must issue a reasoned order on merits under Section ...

Supreme Court rules that foreign taxpayers without current projects or PE in India can still set off expenses and depreciation against refund ...

The Court ruled that trade with PoK falls within India’s taxable territory, attracting CGST and SGST. Key takeaway: PoK is treated as part of India for GST place-of-supply ...

The Tribunal found the Final Order invalid as it was issued before the 30-day objection period under Section 144C expired. This violated the assessee’s procedural rights. All transfer pricing ...

The Tribunal recognized the assessee’s health issues and financial weakness as valid grounds for condoning delay, following the Supreme Court’s principle favouring substantial justice. It held that ...

The Tribunal accepted that the delay arose from an inadvertent error by the assessee’s prior tax consultant during e-filing. It ruled that such a bona fide mistake should not deprive the taxpayer of ...

The Tribunal emphasized that statutory obligations under Section 250(6) cannot be bypassed even when the assessee defaults in appearance. Lack of reasoning and non-discussion of issues rendered the ...

Tribunal rules that documented proof of shareholder identity and creditworthiness outweigh unverified third-party statements for income-tax ...

ITAT observed that NFAC neither followed the mandatory remand requirement under Section 251(1) nor complied with the speaking-order mandate of Section 250(6). Accordingly, the matter was remitted to ...