Section 96(4) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code excludes applications concerning personal guarantors to corporate debtors from the interim moratorium under Section 96 from 26 May 2026. Its reference to an application being filed extends to applications already pending, operating prospectively on their continuing status without impairing vested rights; the identity of the insolvency applicant is irrelevant. Consequently, a pending personal-guarantor insolvency application does not bar a Section 9 arbitration petition after that date. Where arbitration agreements are admitted, narrowly tailored interim measures may include asset disclosure and restraint on alienation or dissipation of disclosed assets, without requiring deposit of the claimed amount.

Leave to appeal against an acquittal may be granted where the challenge raises a prima facie case or arguable points requiring scrutiny of the record and reappreciation of evidence. At the leave stage, the appellate forum should not undertake a minute evaluation of evidence or decide whether the acquittal must ultimately be reversed; the double presumption of innocence alone does not bar leave where deeper review is warranted. For limitation under Section 419(5) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, time spent preparing and delivering a certified copy is excluded; exclusion brought the effective filing period within 180 days, so no delay condonation was required.

Absolute confiscation is unsustainable where confiscable goods have already been redeemed on payment of redemption fine and are no longer available; such a confiscation direction is non est in law. Enhancement of penalties requires a demonstrated basis showing that the revised penalty is proportionate to the offence. Where market value and the resulting profit margin have not been ascertained, enhanced penalties lack adequate justification. The original adjudication permitting redemption and imposing the original penalties consequently remains sustainable.

Freight attributable to vessels engaged on a time-charter basis is to be determined under the prescribed valuation method for daughter vessels, using World Scale Rates where available and an alternative method only where those rates are unavailable. Differential customs duty cannot be sustained through the extended limitation period without deliberate suppression of material facts. Where the same material facts had already formed the basis of an earlier notice, recourse to the extended period is impermissible. Consequently, demands for differential duty, interest and penalties founded solely on the unavailable extended period cannot survive.

Voluntary statements recorded under the Customs Act are substantive evidence because Customs officers are not police officers. An unretracted admission by a customs broker's director that importers were advised to use an incorrect tariff classification to obtain exemption benefits, corroborated by test reports and importers' unretracted statements, established knowing and intentional facilitation of misclassification and undervaluation. Such evidence satisfies the knowledge and intent required for penal liability of the customs broker and its director, supporting the validity of penalties under the Customs Act, 1962.

Special Additional Duty exemption under Notification No. 45/2005-Customs applies to goods stock-transferred from a free trade warehousing zone to a domestic tariff area unit. A stock transfer is not a sale, and VAT deferral until a subsequent sale does not constitute VAT exemption; departmental circulars cannot narrow the notification's scope. The extended limitation period for customs-duty recovery is unavailable where clearances followed prescribed procedures under customs supervision and an officially accepted practice, negating suppression, wilful misstatement, or intent to evade duty. Consequently, the duty demand, confiscation, and penalties founded on the extended period cannot survive.

Customs law gives "importer" an inclusive meaning and permits an aggrieved person to appeal an adjudicating authority's order, supporting maintainability despite filing through a power-of-attorney holder. Provisional release of seized goods remains discretionary and may be denied pending adjudication where goods are prima facie prohibited imports, allegedly misdeclared as to origin, and raise fraud or national-security concerns. The seized dry dates therefore remained subject to statutory adjudication rather than provisional release.

Renewal of charitable registration under section 12AB cannot be refused merely because no registration existed under the erstwhile section 12A or 12AA regime where the entity obtained registration through the applicable statutory route. A valid registration granted under section 12A(1)(ac)(i) remains operative unless cancelled or withdrawn through the separate procedure under section 12AB(4); it cannot be treated as invalid collaterally during renewal. Rejection also cannot rest on an uncommunicated proposed ground or an unspecified objection to a trust deed. Renewal must be reconsidered by examining charitable objects, genuineness of activities and material legal compliance after a reasonable hearing opportunity.

Ex parte reassessment and first appellate orders may be set aside where the assessee sought adjournments, did not file written submissions, and undertakes to produce books and supporting evidence before the assessing authority. Applying principles of natural justice, the matter was restored for fresh assessment after a proper opportunity of hearing, subject to costs. The assessee must substantiate the cash transactions and business explanation in the fresh proceedings.

Cash deposits representing cash sales already recorded in turnover cannot be added again as unexplained cash credits. Where the books debit cash and credit sales, no credit arises in any person's name that creates a liability, and the sales have already entered the computation of taxable income. Section 68 applies only to credited sums not already accounted for in computing income. Rejection of explanations and supporting material without discussion does not support the addition. No statutory restriction equivalent to Section 40A(3) applies to cash sales. The addition of the cash deposits was therefore impermissible and required deletion.

Delay arising from incorrect professional advice, an employer's Form 16, and lack of awareness of an available exemption may constitute sufficient cause for condonation where comparable scheme-related matters received similar treatment. Compensation under the BSNL Voluntary Retirement Scheme 2019 is characterised as retrenchment compensation when the Cabinet-approved, government-funded scheme functioned as a workforce-reduction and cost-rationalisation measure. On that characterisation, the full compensation falls outside the monetary restriction in the first proviso to section 10(10B) and qualifies for exemption.

Capital-gains addition arising from the transfer of claimed rural agricultural land was remanded for fresh examination because the taxpayer's submissions and documentary evidence required reconsideration. The Assessing Officer must re-examine the matter after giving reasonable opportunity to furnish necessary evidence, and the taxpayer must cooperate. The validity of reopening and the taxability of the alleged transfer were not decided on merits. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes through restoration for fresh assessment.

Section 10(27) exempts income of a cooperative society formed to promote the interests of Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes where its membership consists of similarly purposive cooperative societies and its finances are provided by the Government and those societies. Promotion through the lac industry may satisfy the statutory purpose where supported by the society's objects, membership records and beneficiary details. The provision does not require beneficiaries to be exclusively Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes. Substantial Government and similar-society funding may meet the financing condition despite incidental income from other sources.

Ex parte assessment and appellate orders require a proper opportunity for the assessee to present supporting evidence and explanations. Where the assessee alleges defective service of notices and shows that replies were filed during assessment proceedings, adjudication should proceed on merits only after a final hearing opportunity. The matter was restored to the jurisdictional assessing authority for fresh adjudication after affording that opportunity.

Section 263 revisionary jurisdiction cannot be used to direct initiation of penalty under Section 271AAD where the Principal Commissioner lacks statutory power to impose or direct that penalty. Penalty proceedings are separate from assessment proceedings; therefore, an assessment order is not erroneous and prejudicial to Revenue merely because penalty was not initiated. Where the underlying disallowance remains before the first appellate authority, that authority may independently initiate penalty if warranted. A revisional authority cannot require the assessing authority to perform an act that the revisional authority itself is not empowered to perform. The direction to initiate penalty was beyond jurisdiction and invalid.

Exemption for a charitable trust registered under Section 12AB should not be denied solely because Form 10BB was uploaded after Form 10B, where the delay was bona fide and the substantive conditions for exemption are otherwise met. A just, balanced and equitable approach may be applied to this procedural lapse. Exemption under Section 11 was directed to be granted after verification of the belatedly filed Form 10BB.

Revisionary jurisdiction could not be invoked where the assessment record showed that the Assessing Officer specifically sought section-wise details and supporting evidence for Chapter VIA deductions, and the taxpayer provided the donation receipt, explanatory note and bank extracts for the CSR contribution claimed under section 80G. An assessment order need not contain detailed discussion when the enquiry and response are evident from the record. A revisionary authority cannot rely merely on a view that further enquiry was warranted or that another view on allowability was possible. The assessment order was not both erroneous and prejudicial to Revenue interests, rendering the revisionary order invalid.

Unverified trade-credit entries cannot be accepted merely because they are recorded as sundry creditors. Section 68 requires evidentiary examination of credits, including support for any claimed exemption under Section 10(23B); the credit additions and exemption claim require fresh factual verification. Similarly, reduction of a business-expenditure disallowance cannot rest on an unsupported percentage estimate. Evidence substantiating the expenditure must be examined before relief is granted under Section 37(1). The relevant credits, expenditure and exemption claim require reconsideration on the evidentiary record in fresh assessment proceedings.

Commissioner (Appeals) cannot dismiss an income-tax appeal for non-prosecution where it has not been withdrawn and contains substantive grounds challenging reassessment proceedings and additions. Non-compliance with subsequent notices does not remove the appellate obligation to decide the grounds raised on their merits. Dismissal without addressing those grounds is unsustainable. Fresh adjudication is required after giving the assessee an opportunity to substantiate the contentions.

For Assessment Year 2025-26, the first proviso to section 87A applied where total income fell within the prescribed limit and did not exclude income-tax on short-term capital gains taxable at the special rate under section 111A. Section 111A prescribed a tax rate but did not bar the rebate. The subsequent restriction limiting rebate to tax computed under section 115BAC(1A) took effect only from 1 April 2026 and did not apply to the preceding year. Administrative guidance or return-processing systems could not create a substantive statutory exclusion. Full section 87A rebate therefore remained available despite such short-term capital gains.