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...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
The HC allowed the petitioner's writ and directed the respondent to refund the wrongly retained tax together with interest under s.243 until payment, holding that the respondent lacked statutory authority to set off or retain the amount because it failed to demonstrate any tax liability due from the petitioner. The court emphasized that recovery of tax requires a specific charging provision and rejected reliance on prior authorities as inapplicable to the distinct cause of action. Consequential relief in the form of interest was granted and the respondent was ordered to complete the refund process within ten weeks from communication of the order.
The HC allowed the petitioner's writ and directed the respondent to refund the wrongly retained tax together with interest under s.243 until payment, holding that the respondent lacked statutory authority to set off or retain the amount because it failed to demonstrate any tax liability due from the petitioner. The court emphasized that recovery of tax requires a specific charging provision and rejected reliance on prior authorities as inapplicable to the distinct cause of action. Consequential relief in the form of interest was granted and the respondent was ordered to complete the refund process within ten weeks from communication of the order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4786
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
