Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
International transaction benchmarking restricts transfer pricing adjustments to associated-enterprise dealings, while functional comparability govern...
Joint development agreements defer taxable transfer where possession lacks part performance, while completed flats determine consideration and exempti...
Passenger baggage re-export requires true declaration and cannot be granted indirectly through discretionary redemption of undeclared prohibited goods...
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.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4824 
Join Channel 
