Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
Refund limitation turned on whether an earlier refund application, allegedly filed on 02.06.2011, had in fact been received by the Department; if receipt is proved, that date would govern limitation and the claim would not be time-barred. Because there was no record evidence of receipt, the question was remanded to the refund sanctioning authority for verification. The appellate authority had also exceeded the scope of the original rejection by introducing a new ground on proof of payment; that reasoning was set aside. On remand, the authority may examine double payment and whether the statutory bar of unjust enrichment under Section 27 is satisfied.
Refund limitation turned on whether an earlier refund application, allegedly filed on 02.06.2011, had in fact been received by the Department; if receipt is proved, that date would govern limitation and the claim would not be time-barred. Because there was no record evidence of receipt, the question was remanded to the refund sanctioning authority for verification. The appellate authority had also exceeded the scope of the original rejection by introducing a new ground on proof of payment; that reasoning was set aside. On remand, the authority may examine double payment and whether the statutory bar of unjust enrichment under Section 27 is satisfied.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
