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...
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 4819 
Join Channel 
