Tag Archives: HIGH COURT OF MADRAS

TDS Credit Cannot Be Denied To Assessee When Deducted And Deposited Under Their PAN

By | July 22, 2026

TDS Credit Cannot Be Denied To Assessee When Deducted And Deposited Under Their PAN Issue Whether an assessee, acting as a Kaccha Arahtia/commission agent, is entitled to full credit of TDS deducted under Section 194Q by purchasers and deposited into the Government Treasury under their PAN, even if the corresponding gross turnover was not taxable… Read More »

Medical Reimbursements Up to ₹15,000 Are Exempt From Fringe Benefit Tax for Employers

By | July 18, 2026

Medical Reimbursements Up to ₹15,000 Are Exempt From Fringe Benefit Tax for Employers Issue Whether medical reimbursements up to ₹15,000 per employee per annum, which are exempt from tax in the hands of the employees, are liable for Fringe Benefit Tax (FBT) in the hands of the employer under Section 115WB. Facts The case pertains… Read More »

Input tax credit cannot be denied for GSTR-2A mismatches caused by technical portal glitches.

By | July 16, 2026

Input tax credit cannot be denied for GSTR-2A mismatches caused by technical portal glitches. Input tax credit cannot be denied for GSTR-2A mismatches caused by technical portal glitches. Issue Whether an input tax credit (ITC) claim can be denied and subjected to interest and a 100% penalty solely because the underlying supplies are not reflected… Read More »

Dismissal of a writ appeal is warranted when a show cause notice requires factual examination.

By | July 16, 2026

Dismissal of a writ appeal is warranted when a show cause notice requires factual examination. Dismissal of a writ appeal is warranted when a show cause notice requires factual examination. Issue Whether a writ petition challenging a Show Cause Notice (SCN) that demands GST on an overseas government construction project is maintainable, or if the… Read More »

Deletion of penalty by the Tribunal warrants quashing of criminal prosecution for tax evasion.

By | July 16, 2026

Deletion of penalty by the Tribunal warrants quashing of criminal prosecution for tax evasion. Issue Whether a criminal prosecution for a willful attempt to evade tax under Section 276C(1) can be sustained or must be quashed if the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has already deleted the penalty levied for concealment of income on the exact… Read More »

Objective Evidence of Fraudulent Invoices and Missing Physical Deliveries Justifies Blocking of Input Tax Credit under Rule 86A

By | July 15, 2026

Objective Evidence of Fraudulent Invoices and Missing Physical Deliveries Justifies Blocking of Input Tax Credit under Rule 86A Issue Whether the tax department’s decision to block the petitioner’s Input Tax Credit (ITC) of approximately ₹4.11 crore under Rule 86A of the CGST Rules was legally valid, based on objective “reasons to believe” that the underlying… Read More »

Court Upholds Extended Limitation for Wrongful ITC and Validates November 2024 Assessment Orders

By | July 15, 2026

Court Upholds Extended Limitation for Wrongful ITC and Validates November 2024 Assessment Orders Court Upholds Extended Limitation for Wrongful ITC and Validates November 2024 Assessment Orders Issue Issue I (Extended Period of Limitation): Whether the tax department is justified in invoking the extended period of limitation under Section 74 based on the wrongful availment of… Read More »

Ex-Parte Assessment Order Involving GSTR Mismatches Set Aside And Remanded Due To Timing Differences In Government TDS Reporting

By | July 11, 2026

Ex-Parte Assessment Order Involving GSTR Mismatches Set Aside And Remanded Due To Timing Differences In Government TDS Reporting Issue Whether an ex-parte assessment order imposing tax, interest, and Section 74 penalties due to variations between GSTR-1/GSTR-3B and Form GSTR-7 can be sustained when the discrepancy arises because government departments report transactions and deposit TDS only… Read More »

Invocation of Section 74 Is Valid on Prima Facie Material but Material Errors Require Remand

By | July 11, 2026

Invocation of Section 74 Is Valid on Prima Facie Material but Material Errors Require Remand Invocation of Section 74 Is Valid on Prima Facie Material but Material Errors Require Remand Issue Whether the revenue authorities are legally entitled to invoke the fraud machinery under Section 74 based on the prima facie standard of “where it… Read More »

Rule 257 One-Year Practice Requirement for Income Tax Practitioner Registration is Statutorily Valid and Enforceable

By | July 11, 2026

Rule 257 One-Year Practice Requirement for Income Tax Practitioner Registration is Statutorily Valid and Enforceable Issue Whether Rule 257 of the Income-tax Rules, 2026, which mandates a minimum of one year of prior appearance/practice before Income Tax Authorities to qualify for registration as an Income Tax Practitioner, is ultra vires or inconsistent with Section 515… Read More »