https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=787045 A writ order directing refund of tax deducted at source from land acquisition compensation was set aside because the same amount, with interest, had already been refunded in income-tax proceedings under Section 143(1) and Section 244A. The Court found that the writ petition was founded on incomplete and misleading facts and appeared to seek the same refund twice. As the alleged non-refund was factually incorrect, the relief based on exemption under Section 96 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 could not be sustained. The appeal was allowed and costs were imposed. en-us Mon, 16 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 24 Feb 2026 18:12:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=787045 A writ order directing refund of tax deducted at source from land acquisition compensation was set aside because the same amount, with interest, had already been refunded in income-tax proceedings under Section 143(1) and Section 244A. The Court found that the writ petition was founded on incomplete and misleading facts and appeared to seek the same refund twice. As the alleged non-refund was factually incorrect, the relief based on exemption under Section 96 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 could not be sustained. The appeal was allowed and costs were imposed. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 16 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=787045