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...
HC allowed the petition, holding that the respondent's adjustment of refund for AY 2014-15 against the demand for AY 2016-17 was unjustified. The court noted that the petitioner had already paid 20% of the demand for AY 2016-17, and an appeal was pending. The respondent's action was contrary to CBDT Circular and prior judicial precedent. The court directed the respondent to refund the erroneously adjusted amount, emphasizing that the balance demand should be stayed pending appeal resolution.
HC allowed the petition, holding that the respondent's adjustment of refund for AY 2014-15 against the demand for AY 2016-17 was unjustified. The court noted that the petitioner had already paid 20% of the demand for AY 2016-17, and an appeal was pending. The respondent's action was contrary to CBDT Circular and prior judicial precedent. The court directed the respondent to refund the erroneously adjusted amount, emphasizing that the balance demand should be stayed pending appeal resolution.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
