Latest court orders, judgments, and legal developments from Indian courts — AI-curated and summarized.
The Karnataka High Court affirmed that the limitation period for penalties under Section 275 of the Income Tax Act commences with the issuance of the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax's notice, not from the Assessment Officer's proposal.
In a VAT return dispute, the Karnataka High Court dismissed a review petition related to lost books of account, stating that blame cannot be shifted to tax consultants. This ruling emphasizes accountability in tax reporting.
The Reserve Bank of India has published comprehensive data on Overseas Direct Investment for June 2026, detailing investment flows and regulatory actions.
The Karnataka High Court has permitted a delayed appeal against GST orders to be heard on its merits, directing authorities to entertain the appeal despite limitation objections.
The Bombay High Court ruled that anticipatory bail could not be granted in GST-related cases unless there is an existing Section 69 arrest order. The ruling highlights procedural requirements for arrests under GST.
The Madras High Court has ruled that Input Tax Credit (ITC) cannot be denied solely because the supplier is later declared non-existent. The ruling stresses the need for thorough examination of documentary evidence.
The Orissa High Court has set aside a GST appellate order that incorrectly categorized interest as tax, leading to a wrongful pre-deposit requirement under Section 112. This case highlights the importance of accurate documentation in GST assessments.
The Bombay High Court has quashed an ex parte GST order as it was uploaded in the incorrect portal section, denying the taxpayer a chance to respond. This ruling underscores the importance of proper procedural adherence in tax-related matters.
The Chhattisgarh High Court has allowed a state tax officer to submit a representation for retrospective seniority and associated monetary benefits. The court directed the authorities to resolve this representation within 120 days.
The ITAT ruled that issues with FCRA renewal cannot be a basis for denying registration under Section 12AB of the Income Tax Act. This emphasizes the independence of the registration process from FCRA issues.
The Delhi High Court ruled that once the President of ITAT transfers an appeal, the designated Bench cannot dismiss it based on territorial jurisdiction. This decision reinforces the authority of the President in handling appeal reallocations.
The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a state's appeal regarding penalties on machinery transport, limiting the penalty to ₹25,000 for non-compliance with e-way bill requirements.