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...
Rejection of a tax refund claim as time-barred was held unsustainable because the record showed the claimant had filed an initial refund application on 09.05.2023 within the statutory period for January 2019 to March 2021, and also filed a further claim on 28.02.2024, the date the authority itself treated as the outer limit, yet neither filing was duly considered. The authority also failed to apply the Covid-19 limitation exclusion under Notification No. 13/2022, covering March 2020 to February 2022, which operated to extend limitation. The refund applications were held within time and the impugned order was set aside. - HC
Rejection of a tax refund claim as time-barred was held unsustainable because the record showed the claimant had filed an initial refund application on 09.05.2023 within the statutory period for January 2019 to March 2021, and also filed a further claim on 28.02.2024, the date the authority itself treated as the outer limit, yet neither filing was duly considered. The authority also failed to apply the Covid-19 limitation exclusion under Notification No. 13/2022, covering March 2020 to February 2022, which operated to extend limitation. The refund applications were held within time and the impugned order was set aside. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.