Condonation of Delay: directoral disputes and pending company proceedings can constitute reasonable cause, allowing a belated return to be treated as ...
Revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 upheld; faceless assessments subject to revision when AO fails requisite enquiries, remitted for fresh asse...
Limited scope of processing under section 143(1): enhancement without show cause is unsustainable; remand for residency, taxation and TDS verification...
An appellant seeking repayment of a deposit must prove that the respondent company actually received the amount as its deposit; where the receipt and bank details showed credit to another entity treated as a separate legal person, the claim against the company was not maintainable on that basis. Once the company entered corporate insolvency resolution process, the moratorium barred continuation of pending proceedings and the insolvency framework became the only route for recovery through submission of a claim in the insolvency process. The appeal was therefore treated as infructuous, without prejudice to pursuit of the insolvency remedy.
An appellant seeking repayment of a deposit must prove that the respondent company actually received the amount as its deposit; where the receipt and bank details showed credit to another entity treated as a separate legal person, the claim against the company was not maintainable on that basis. Once the company entered corporate insolvency resolution process, the moratorium barred continuation of pending proceedings and the insolvency framework became the only route for recovery through submission of a claim in the insolvency process. The appeal was therefore treated as infructuous, without prejudice to pursuit of the insolvency remedy.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.