Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
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.