https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208853 The court found the writ petition maintainable despite alleged concealment of facts. It clarified that Section 220(6) does not apply when an appeal is before the ITAT. The court disagreed with the ITAT, stating that recovery includes adjustments under Section 245. It criticized the ITAT for not deciding the stay application and directed it to hear the appeal promptly. The court ordered the Revenue to refund Rs.30 crores to the petitioner and deemed the order under Section 220(6) null and void. en-us Fri, 25 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 10 Dec 2012 15:22:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208853 The court found the writ petition maintainable despite alleged concealment of facts. It clarified that Section 220(6) does not apply when an appeal is before the ITAT. The court disagreed with the ITAT, stating that recovery includes adjustments under Section 245. It criticized the ITAT for not deciding the stay application and directed it to hear the appeal promptly. The court ordered the Revenue to refund Rs.30 crores to the petitioner and deemed the order under Section 220(6) null and void. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 25 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208853