• Thu. Mar 12th, 2026
    • '

    Tag: Indian tax jurisprudence

    Bombay High Court Quashes GST Penalties, Rules Section 122(1A) Cannot Be Applied Retrospectively
    Bombay High Court Quashes GST Penalties, Rules Section 122(1A) Cannot Be Applied Retrospectively
    High CourtLatest news

    Bombay High Court Quashes GST Penalties, Rules Section 122(1A) Cannot Be Applied Retrospectively

    The Bombay High Court quashed Rs.133.60 crore GST penalty notices against three Shemaroo Entertainment Ltd. executives, ruling Section 122(1A) of the CGST Act cannot apply retrospectively and requires proof of benefit and instigation, protecting them under Article 20(1).

    author
    Reassessment Based Only on Audit Objection Is Impermissible Review: Delhi High Court
    Reassessment Based Only on Audit Objection Is Impermissible Review: Delhi High Court
    High CourtLatest news

    Reassessment Based Only on Audit Objection Is Impermissible Review: Delhi High Court

    The Delhi High Court held that reassessment initiated solely on an audit objection, despite prior scrutiny, amounted to an impermissible review and clear change of opinion. It ruled the notice was time-barred under Section 149, as inapplicable facts existed.

    author
    Summons are Merely a Step in Inquiry, Not Adjudication: Delhi High Court Draws Distinct Line Under Section 70 CGST Act 
    Summons are Merely a Step in Inquiry, Not Adjudication: Delhi High Court Draws Distinct Line Under Section 70 CGST Act 
    High CourtLatest news

    Summons are Merely a Step in Inquiry, Not Adjudication: Delhi High Court Draws Distinct Line Under Section 70 CGST Act 

    Delhi High Court ruled that GST summons under Section 70 cannot be routinely challenged through writ jurisdiction, holding they are investigative tools, not adjudication. Justice Neena Bansal Krishna stressed safeguarding liberty while permitting robust investigation of serious economic offences.

    author
    Shares Received After Amalgamation Are Taxable as Business Income Under Section 28: Supreme Court
    Shares Received After Amalgamation Are Taxable as Business Income Under Section 28: Supreme Court
    Supreme Court

    Shares Received After Amalgamation Are Taxable as Business Income Under Section 28: Supreme Court

    The Supreme Court held that shares in an amalgamating company, when held as stock-in-trade, result in taxable business income under Section 28 of the Income Tax Act. Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan dismissed appeals, holding Section 47(vii) inapplicable.

    author
    Supreme Court Rejects Tata Sponge Iron’s Plea Against Odisha Entry Tax, No Refund Allowed
    Supreme Court Rejects Tata Sponge Iron’s Plea Against Odisha Entry Tax, No Refund Allowed
    Supreme Court

    Supreme Court Rejects Tata Sponge Iron’s Plea Against Odisha Entry Tax, No Refund Allowed

    The Supreme Court refused to entertain Tata Sponge Iron Limited’s challenge to constitutional validity of the Odisha Entry Tax Act, 1999, upholding Orissa High Court’s dismissal. A Bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and Prasanna B Varale found no infirmity.

    author
    Big Relief For Nestle India: Supreme Court Dismisses Income Tax Appeals In Rs.101 Crore Dispute
    Big Relief For Nestle India: Supreme Court Dismisses Income Tax Appeals In Rs.101 Crore Dispute
    Supreme Court

    Big Relief For Nestle India: Supreme Court Dismisses Income Tax Appeals In Rs.101 Crore Dispute

    The Supreme Court dismissed Income Tax appeals against Nestlé India, upholding allowance of general licensing fees and ending a long-running Rs 101.21 crore tax dispute. The controversy concerned alleged excessive licence fees for financial years 1996–98, 1999–2001, and 2004–2008.

    author
    Common or Trade Parlance Test Must Be Used: Supreme Court Clarifies Key Principles in Tax Classification
    Common or Trade Parlance Test Must Be Used: Supreme Court Clarifies Key Principles in Tax Classification
    Supreme Court

    Common or Trade Parlance Test Must Be Used: Supreme Court Clarifies Key Principles in Tax Classification

    The Supreme Court highlighted important principles for applying the common or trade parlance test in classification disputes under taxation laws. Previously, the CESTAT ruled that imported ‘aluminium shelves’ should be classified as parts of agricultural machinery under CTI 84369900.

    author