Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
The Appellate Tribunal addressed the issue of refund of excess taxes claimed by the Assessee due to a difference in the amount of TDS and Advance Tax as computed by the Department compared to what was reflected in Form 26AS. The Tribunal held that u/s 240(b) of the Act, the Assessee was eligible for the refund. The assessment showed a shortfall in the refund payable to the Assessee, as the correct amount was higher than what was initially refunded. The Assessee had already paid the excess amount through Advance tax and TDS, as evidenced by Form 26AS. The Tribunal directed the revenue authorities to refund the due amount to the Assessee, along with applicable interest u/s 244A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appeal of the Assessee was allowed.
The Appellate Tribunal addressed the issue of refund of excess taxes claimed by the Assessee due to a difference in the amount of TDS and Advance Tax as computed by the Department compared to what was reflected in Form 26AS. The Tribunal held that u/s 240(b) of the Act, the Assessee was eligible for the refund. The assessment showed a shortfall in the refund payable to the Assessee, as the correct amount was higher than what was initially refunded. The Assessee had already paid the excess amount through Advance tax and TDS, as evidenced by Form 26AS. The Tribunal directed the revenue authorities to refund the due amount to the Assessee, along with applicable interest u/s 244A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appeal of the Assessee was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
