Opportunity to furnish unsecured-loan confirmations is required before reassessment initiation; proceedings require fresh consideration after taxpayer...
Under-reporting on a first reassessment return attracts penalty, while enhanced misreporting penalty requires proof of a statutory misreporting catego...
The SC set aside the High Court's order awarding 15% interest on refund amount to a home buyer and restored NCDRC's order granting 9% interest. The Court found that while the buyer was entitled to refund due to significant construction delays, the 15% interest rate was excessive. Applying precedent from Bangalore Development Authority v. Syndicate Bank, the Court determined that purchasers deserve reasonable interest when possession is delayed, but distinguished this case from Rohit Chaudhary v. Vipul Ltd., noting different circumstances. The compensation was reduced from 10,00,000 to 7,50,000, balancing justice considerations and the appellant's status as a state instrumentality. The appeal was partly allowed.
The SC set aside the High Court's order awarding 15% interest on refund amount to a home buyer and restored NCDRC's order granting 9% interest. The Court found that while the buyer was entitled to refund due to significant construction delays, the 15% interest rate was excessive. Applying precedent from Bangalore Development Authority v. Syndicate Bank, the Court determined that purchasers deserve reasonable interest when possession is delayed, but distinguished this case from Rohit Chaudhary v. Vipul Ltd., noting different circumstances. The compensation was reduced from 10,00,000 to 7,50,000, balancing justice considerations and the appellant's status as a state instrumentality. The appeal was partly allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4915 
