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...
HC held that the assessee failed to deposit 20% of the disputed demand (Rs. 69,05,933/-) as a pre-condition for staying the demand for AY 2016-17. The outstanding demand was consequently recovered from the refund due for AY 2014-15 through an appeal effect order. The court rejected the assessee's contention that the refund adjustment was contrary to the office memorandum, thereby upholding the tax authority's action of recovering the disputed amount through available refund mechanisms.
HC held that the assessee failed to deposit 20% of the disputed demand (Rs. 69,05,933/-) as a pre-condition for staying the demand for AY 2016-17. The outstanding demand was consequently recovered from the refund due for AY 2014-15 through an appeal effect order. The court rejected the assessee's contention that the refund adjustment was contrary to the office memorandum, thereby upholding the tax authority's action of recovering the disputed amount through available refund mechanisms.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.