Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
The petitioner challenged orders u/s 62 of the TNGST Act for failing to furnish returns from April to July 2023 within the prescribed period. The High Court held that considering similar circumstances where the petitioner was granted an opportunity upon payment of 25% of the differential tax, it directed the petitioner to deposit 25% of the differential tax between the tax remitted in GSTR 3B and the assessed tax within two weeks. If such tax is paid, the assessing officer shall redo the assessment after hearing the petitioner. The impugned order was set aside, and the assessing officer was directed to consider the impact of the amendment and pass fresh orders on merits in accordance with the law. The petition was disposed of.
The petitioner challenged orders u/s 62 of the TNGST Act for failing to furnish returns from April to July 2023 within the prescribed period. The High Court held that considering similar circumstances where the petitioner was granted an opportunity upon payment of 25% of the differential tax, it directed the petitioner to deposit 25% of the differential tax between the tax remitted in GSTR 3B and the assessed tax within two weeks. If such tax is paid, the assessing officer shall redo the assessment after hearing the petitioner. The impugned order was set aside, and the assessing officer was directed to consider the impact of the amendment and pass fresh orders on merits in accordance with the law. The petition was disposed of.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
