Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
The HC set aside the respondent's order dated 03.09.2024 and allowed the petition. The court held that the Assessing Officer's unilateral debit from the petitioner's cash ledger toward disputed interest amounts was erroneous, without jurisdiction, and contrary to Section 107(7) mandate. The court determined that where an appellant has paid amounts under sub-section (6), recovery proceedings for balance amounts are deemed stayed per Section 107(7). Consequently, the unilateral debit undertaken by the Assessing Officer was impermissible, rendering the rejection order unsustainable and liable to be set aside.
The HC set aside the respondent's order dated 03.09.2024 and allowed the petition. The court held that the Assessing Officer's unilateral debit from the petitioner's cash ledger toward disputed interest amounts was erroneous, without jurisdiction, and contrary to Section 107(7) mandate. The court determined that where an appellant has paid amounts under sub-section (6), recovery proceedings for balance amounts are deemed stayed per Section 107(7). Consequently, the unilateral debit undertaken by the Assessing Officer was impermissible, rendering the rejection order unsustainable and liable to be set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.