Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
Insolvency professional agency governance rules amended to add nominee directors, tighten independent director eligibility, and regulate managing dire...
Refund under GST can be withheld only when the statutory conditions for invoking Section 54(11) are actually satisfied, including a pending proceeding or appeal; the mere possibility that the State may file an appeal is insufficient. The High Court held that the authority could not refuse to process a refund arising from an appellate order simply because the appeal period had not expired, as that showed no conscious application of mind and no valid basis under Rule 92(2). The refusal was set aside and the refund claim remitted for fresh consideration after hearing the taxpayer and passing a reasoned order.
Refund under GST can be withheld only when the statutory conditions for invoking Section 54(11) are actually satisfied, including a pending proceeding or appeal; the mere possibility that the State may file an appeal is insufficient. The High Court held that the authority could not refuse to process a refund arising from an appellate order simply because the appeal period had not expired, as that showed no conscious application of mind and no valid basis under Rule 92(2). The refusal was set aside and the refund claim remitted for fresh consideration after hearing the taxpayer and passing a reasoned order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
