Duplicate GST adjudication on the same issues and assessment period is unsustainable where Central GST authorities have already issued an order and that order remains under appeal. The subsequent State GST assessment and rectification orders addressed identical issues for the identical period, thereby duplicating the earlier Central GST adjudication. The State GST orders were quashed, and the writ petition was allowed.

Section 74 of the CGST Act requires evidence of fraud, willful misstatement or deliberate suppression with intent to evade tax; mere availment of ineligible self-assessed input tax credit does not meet that standard. Disclosure of ITC reconciliation in GSTR-9C and annual returns on the GST portal negates an allegation of concealed facts absent contrary evidence. Failure to reply to an audit enquiry or final audit report is likewise not suppression where the underlying data is disclosed and no statutory reply is required. A demand also cannot be sustained on a ground introduced beyond the show cause notice, as this denies the taxpayer an opportunity to respond and breaches natural justice.

Section 93 of the CGST/KGST Act limits a legal representative's liability where a deceased proprietor's business has discontinued: recovery may be made only from the deceased's estate and only after notice, inquiry and ascertainment of that estate. Continuation of proceedings without notice to the legal heir or examination of inherited assets is treated as procedurally unsustainable. Separately, Section 16(5), retrospectively effective from 1 July 2017, overrides the belated-return restriction in Section 16(4) for invoices relating to FY 2017-18 to 2020-21 where the relevant Section 39 return was filed by 30 November 2021. Eligible input tax credit is therefore available where that deadline is met.

Psyllium seeds (Isabgol) fall under tariff sub-heading 1211 90 13 because Heading 1211 specifically covers Psyllium seed and includes Plantago psyllium herbs and seeds used primarily in pharmacy. GST exemption for fresh or chilled seeds depends on the condition of goods when supplied. Storage in dry, ventilated godowns constitutes drying; without evidence that the seeds remained fresh from harvest until supply, they are treated as dried goods. Dried Psyllium seeds are taxable at 5 per cent under the entry for frozen or dried plants and plant parts, while exemptions for fresh or chilled goods and goods of seed quality do not apply.

Penalty notices under section 271(1)(c) must clearly identify whether the charge concerns concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars. The two limbs are independent and may require different explanations and treatment; therefore, a notice retaining both alternatives without specifying the applicable limb denies the assessee a proper opportunity to defend. Recording satisfaction to initiate penalty proceedings does not cure this defect. Applying this principle, the High Court treated the defective notice as invalid, upheld deletion of the penalty, and dismissed the revenue's appeal.

Pre-reassessment procedure requires the Assessing Officer to issue a show-cause notice, consider the taxpayer's reply and form only a prima facie view that income has escaped assessment. Absence of an oral hearing at that preliminary stage does not by itself invalidate the pre-reassessment order or consequential reassessment notice where a substantive opportunity remains available during reassessment. Information concerning unsecured loans and cash deposits may be considered collectively where intrinsically connected to the alleged escaped income; the genuineness of the loan is to be examined in reassessment. The reassessment must provide a meaningful personal hearing and consider further documents and explanations, with merits left open.

Subletting charges paid to MIDC as a mandatory condition for subletting leasehold property are treated as an integral cost of earning rental income. Taxable income from house property is therefore computed on net rental income after reducing those charges. The standard deduction available for house property income under section 24(a) does not prevent deduction of such pre-receipt expenditure, because the charges are necessary to commercially exploit the leasehold property through subletting. The disallowance of the charges was deleted and the deduction was allowed.

Cash consideration receivable, whether as advance or otherwise, for transfer of immovable property falls within "specified sum" and is governed by section 269SS; the contention that section 269ST exclusively applied was rejected. However, penalty under section 271D could not be sustained for an assessment year in which no cash consideration was received. As the relevant receipts occurred in an earlier financial year, the penalty levied for AY 2017-18 was held invalid and deleted. The Tribunal also noted that part of the receipts preceded the amendment extending section 269SS to specified sums connected with immovable property transfers.

Rebate under section 87A is available against tax payable on short-term capital gains chargeable under section 111A where an individual has opted for the concessional tax regime under section 115BAC. The position follows Tribunal precedent supporting the rebate, with no contrary High Court or Supreme Court authority identified. The Revenue's challenge to the rebate was rejected, sustaining its grant for assessment year 2024-25.

Agricultural income from date sales cannot be partly treated as income from other sources merely on a mathematical estimate of probable yield based on an earlier field report concerning damaged plants. Where agricultural operations, plantation, source of produce and recorded sale proceeds are accepted, contrary material is required to reject the disclosed quantity or receipts; the addition was deleted. Agricultural expenditure also cannot be enhanced to a fixed percentage of gross receipts without evidence that specific expenses are false or inadmissible, or cogent comparable, agricultural or expert material. The ad hoc expenditure addition was deleted, with consequential interest to be recomputed.

Section 115BBE applies only to income properly brought within the deeming provisions in sections 68 to 69D; it does not independently tax income merely because it was surrendered or undisclosed during a survey. Each deeming provision has distinct foundational conditions that must be identified and satisfied. Where the assessment neither invoked a relevant deeming provision nor established that the surrendered income fell within sections 68 to 69D, the special rate cannot apply. The surrendered income was therefore taxable at the assessee's normal applicable rate.

Donor-directed corpus contributions received by an approved educational institution retain their corpus character where donors specifically earmark them, even when exemption is claimed under section 10(23C)(vi) rather than section 11. Such contributions are materially distinct from ordinary voluntary receipts available for application towards institutional objects. The absence of identically worded corpus provisions in section 10(23C)(vi) during the relevant year does not by itself recharacterise genuine corpus receipts as taxable revenue, absent material showing that the corpus designation is a facade. Accordingly, the addition for these corpus contributions was deleted.

Tax-audit obligations do not arise where turnover remains below the enhanced threshold available to taxpayers whose cash receipts and cash payments stay within prescribed limits. Financial statements, bank statements and reconciliation may establish that operational revenue was received through banking channels; differences between bank credits and reported revenue may be attributable to GST and tax deducted at source. Absence of opening or closing cash-in-hand, supported by these records and the tax audit report, can demonstrate that no disqualifying cash transactions occurred. Consequently, penalty for failure to obtain a tax audit is not sustainable where the enhanced threshold applies.

Consistency in transfer pricing assessment required deletion of a notional-interest adjustment on non-interest-bearing Non-Convertible Debentures where identical terms had been accepted at arm's length in an earlier year. The debentures provided no periodic interest and included a redemption premium linked to the holding period. Although res judicata does not apply to tax assessments, unchanged fundamental facts and arrangements require consistent treatment. The Transfer Pricing Officer could not reverse the earlier accepted position by imputing interest on both current and prior subscriptions without initiating a permissible statutory proceeding. The notional-interest adjustment was deleted.

Rectification under section 154 cannot withdraw a deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) that was expressly claimed and accepted after scrutiny where its eligibility involves a debatable statutory question. Interest income was claimed as business income attributable to a co-operative society's activities and allowed after verification under section 143(3). The subsequent view that the claim was inconsistent with decisions concerning section 80P(2)(d) required reconsideration of an already examined claim, rather than correction of a mistake apparent from the record. The rectification and appellate orders reversing the deduction were therefore set aside.

Transportation expenditure incurred before contract work was handed to a sub-contractor remained deductible where a memorandum recorded the parties' prior understanding that the assessee would bear that cost. The later execution of the definitive sub-contract did not displace that arrangement, and no duplicate claim by the sub-contractor was alleged; the disallowance was therefore deleted. Labour cess and copy charges deducted from the assessee's contract bills under tender terms were also deductible because the assessee incurred and bore them, their genuineness was undisputed, and the sub-contractor had not claimed them. The related disallowance of sublet expenses was deleted.

Cash-method accounting precludes taxation of notional interest, dividend or interest income unless actual receipt is established; rejection of books does not by itself justify mercantile or presumptive assessment. Ready-forward securities transactions are treated in substance as short-term lending and do not necessarily generate share-trading profit. Negative opening stock, undelivered securities transactions, brokered trades and prior-year advances cannot be treated as unexplained investment for the relevant year without supporting material. Unexplained bank credits remain taxable where their nature and source are not satisfactorily explained. Appellate enhancement requires opportunity, while disclosed-source claims may require verificatio.....

Overseas NRI Desk costs, including allocable staff, administrative, support, internal audit, financial control, IT, human resources, operations, rent, maintenance, depreciation and advertising expenses, fall within the Explanation to section 44C when incurred by a non-resident banking company. They are therefore treated as head office expenditure subject to the statutory limitation under section 44C, rather than direct business expenditure fully deductible under section 37(1). The disallowance of full deduction under section 37(1) was sustained, consistently with the settled treatment in earlier years and the cited Supreme Court authority.

Offshore principal-to-principal sales of CKD kits, raw materials, spare parts and CBU cars may fall outside Indian taxation where contracts are concluded abroad and no further sales activity occurs in India. Mere ownership of an Indian subsidiary does not create a fixed place permanent establishment where the foreign enterprise has no right to use its premises, no place of management there, and conducts no operations in India. An Indian entity acting only as a communication channel, without contract-concluding authority or habitual order securing role, is not a dependent agent. In the absence of a permanent establishment, no profits are attributable to India under the treaty.

Section 2(9)(C) of the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act requires the purported owner to be unaware of, or deny knowledge of, ownership. Acknowledgements by alleged benamidars during cross-examination that they knew of share allotments and buy-backs, and received the consideration in their bank accounts, prevent the transactions from meeting that requirement. Such acknowledgements prevail over conflicting statements made in income-tax proceedings. Potential tax evasion reflected in trade-payable entries does not, by itself, establish a benami transaction. Consequently, provisional attachment cannot be confirmed where the statutory knowledge requirement is not satisfied.