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...
CESTAT held that the department improperly attempted to reopen a previously settled refund claim through piecemeal adjudication. The Tribunal applied the doctrine of res judicata, noting that Revenue failed to challenge the First Appellate Authority's order which had partially allowed the appellant's claim. The department's subsequent review violated judicial discipline and fundamental principles of justice administration. The Tribunal emphasized that an earlier adjudication is conclusive on the same subject matter between the same parties, and that no person should be vexed twice for the same cause. The impugned order was set aside, with the appeals allowed and consequential relief granted to the appellant.
CESTAT held that the department improperly attempted to reopen a previously settled refund claim through piecemeal adjudication. The Tribunal applied the doctrine of res judicata, noting that Revenue failed to challenge the First Appellate Authority's order which had partially allowed the appellant's claim. The department's subsequent review violated judicial discipline and fundamental principles of justice administration. The Tribunal emphasized that an earlier adjudication is conclusive on the same subject matter between the same parties, and that no person should be vexed twice for the same cause. The impugned order was set aside, with the appeals allowed and consequential relief granted to the appellant.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.