Validity of faceless assessment procedure challenged for jurisdictional AO intervention mid-remand, resulting in quashing of assessment for procedural...
Inventory write-off and fraudulent/wrongful trading allegations in corporate insolvency led to director liability principles applied and appeal dismis...
Service of the intimation under Section 143(1) is mandatory before a tax demand can be enforced, and a refund cannot be adjusted against a demand that is not shown to exist and have been served. The department produced only portal screenshots and no copy of the intimation or proof of service, so the alleged demand was treated as unenforceable. On that basis, the High Court quashed the impugned demand and the consequential interest, and held that adjustment of the later-year refund against that demand was impermissible.
Service of the intimation under Section 143(1) is mandatory before a tax demand can be enforced, and a refund cannot be adjusted against a demand that is not shown to exist and have been served. The department produced only portal screenshots and no copy of the intimation or proof of service, so the alleged demand was treated as unenforceable. On that basis, the High Court quashed the impugned demand and the consequential interest, and held that adjustment of the later-year refund against that demand was impermissible.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
