Electronic WhatsApp evidence without authentication or independent corroboration cannot sustain an unexplained-investment addition based on third-part...
Mutual current-account transactions excluded from deemed dividend treatment where no fresh borrowing arose; unsupported unsecured-loan addition also f...
The HC set aside the Revenue's adjustment of refunds due to the petitioner for AY 2020-21 against outstanding demands for AYs 2016-17, 2017-18, and 2018-19. The Court held that the adjustment was unsustainable as the Revenue failed to issue prior notice under Section 245 of the Act, which is mandatory. While acknowledging that refund adjustments against outstanding demands may constitute coercive measures in certain cases, the Court emphasized that appellate authorities could specify limitations to stay orders. The HC directed the Revenue to pay the determined refund amount to the petitioner with applicable interest within eight weeks.
The HC set aside the Revenue's adjustment of refunds due to the petitioner for AY 2020-21 against outstanding demands for AYs 2016-17, 2017-18, and 2018-19. The Court held that the adjustment was unsustainable as the Revenue failed to issue prior notice under Section 245 of the Act, which is mandatory. While acknowledging that refund adjustments against outstanding demands may constitute coercive measures in certain cases, the Court emphasized that appellate authorities could specify limitations to stay orders. The HC directed the Revenue to pay the determined refund amount to the petitioner with applicable interest within eight weeks.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
