Invoice-based recovery claims remain time-barred despite separate winding-up proceedings, absent valid acknowledgment or part-payment of the disputed ...
Extended limitation fails without specific suppression allegations, while overseas employee secondment remains taxable as manpower supply within norma...
Time-share accommodation classification excludes Club or Association Service where purchasers receive contractual occupancy rights without genuine mem...
CENVAT credit for trading requires reversal, while taxable-service rental credit remains proportionately available and limitation issues await resolut...
Vicarious liability for dishonoured company cheques may extend to non-signatory directors where complaints contain foundational responsibility avermen...
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.