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...
Stay of demand - direction to depositing 40% of the outstanding demand - The court found the stance of requiring a 20% pre-deposition as a precondition for stay consideration, as adopted by the respondents, to be legally unsound. Further, it was highlighted that the PCIT exacerbated the petitioner's burden by demanding a 40% deposit without assessing the merits or hardship entailed. The High Court quashed the orders dated 22 November 2021 and 27 February 2024, remanding the matter to the AO for fresh consideration of the stay applications in accordance with the legal position elucidated in the NASSCOM judgment and without prejudice to the merits of the petitioner's challenge.
Stay of demand - direction to depositing 40% of the outstanding demand - The court found the stance of requiring a 20% pre-deposition as a precondition for stay consideration, as adopted by the respondents, to be legally unsound. Further, it was highlighted that the PCIT exacerbated the petitioner's burden by demanding a 40% deposit without assessing the merits or hardship entailed. The High Court quashed the orders dated 22 November 2021 and 27 February 2024, remanding the matter to the AO for fresh consideration of the stay applications in accordance with the legal position elucidated in the NASSCOM judgment and without prejudice to the merits of the petitioner's challenge.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
