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...
The HC set aside the ITAT, Amritsar Bench, and CIT(A), Bathinda orders and remanded the matter to CIT(A) for rehearing of the rectification application under s.154. The court held that entitlement to interest on refund is governed by s.244A and that exclusion of delays attributable to the assessee is a factual inquiry for the revenue authority; the CIT(A) failed to properly determine whether delay was attributable to the assessee. The HC concluded the CIT(A) and ITAT decisions were perverse and founded on virtually no evidence, and directed a fresh factual determination consistent with s.244A and the observations in the judgment.
The HC set aside the ITAT, Amritsar Bench, and CIT(A), Bathinda orders and remanded the matter to CIT(A) for rehearing of the rectification application under s.154. The court held that entitlement to interest on refund is governed by s.244A and that exclusion of delays attributable to the assessee is a factual inquiry for the revenue authority; the CIT(A) failed to properly determine whether delay was attributable to the assessee. The HC concluded the CIT(A) and ITAT decisions were perverse and founded on virtually no evidence, and directed a fresh factual determination consistent with s.244A and the observations in the judgment.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
