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 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.