Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
Refund of excess amount deposited - The petitioner is right in his contention that the maximum liability to deposit the disputed amount in the appeal already preferred by the petitioner, which is pending adjudication is 7.5% of the disputed amount; it follows therefrom that in view of my finding that the impugned letters / orders are illegal and arbitrary and deserve to be quashed, by also applying the principles of restitution, it is necessary to direct the respondents to refund / repay any sum in excess of 7.5% back to the petitioner pending disposal of the appeal and by issuing necessary directions in this regard - HC
Refund of excess amount deposited - The petitioner is right in his contention that the maximum liability to deposit the disputed amount in the appeal already preferred by the petitioner, which is pending adjudication is 7.5% of the disputed amount; it follows therefrom that in view of my finding that the impugned letters / orders are illegal and arbitrary and deserve to be quashed, by also applying the principles of restitution, it is necessary to direct the respondents to refund / repay any sum in excess of 7.5% back to the petitioner pending disposal of the appeal and by issuing necessary directions in this regard - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4784
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
