Benami transaction and beneficial ownership: documentary and circumstantial evidence show payors were true beneficiaries, resulting in PBPTA consequen...
Denial of Preferential Treatment under SAFTA overturned where unchallenged Country of Origin certificate warranted exemption under Notification benefi...
Continuing offence of money-laundering: discharge set aside and proceedings reinstated where laundering continued after inclusion of predicate offence...
Where recovery of a disputed demand was stayed under section 220(6), the High Court held that the Department could not adjust a later-year refund against that stayed demand. The adjustment was treated as illegal, arbitrary and perfunctory because the stay remained operative until disposal of the first appeal. The Court exercised writ jurisdiction to interfere and directed release of the refund computed under the intimation for the later assessment year, together with statutory interest under section 244A, within the time fixed by the Court.
Where recovery of a disputed demand was stayed under section 220(6), the High Court held that the Department could not adjust a later-year refund against that stayed demand. The adjustment was treated as illegal, arbitrary and perfunctory because the stay remained operative until disposal of the first appeal. The Court exercised writ jurisdiction to interfere and directed release of the refund computed under the intimation for the later assessment year, together with statutory interest under section 244A, within the time fixed by the Court.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.