<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Natural justice breaches in import-data additions justified staying recovery while appeal remained pending despite deposit guidance.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=104075</link>
    <description>Natural justice was prima facie breached where an unexplained-expenditure addition based on import data was made without meaningful invoice-wise or bill-of-entry-wise particulars. Recorded imports supplied by the assessee exceeded the aggregate data relied on, and apparent duplication in departmental data prevented reconciliation. The High Court treated the addition as raising strong triable issues and stayed recovery pending first appeal, while requiring the appellate authority to decide independently on merits. Administrative directions concerning deposit of a prescribed demand percentage did not fetter the Court&#039;s stay power; Revenue&#039;s insistence on a 20% payment was rejected. The assessment observations remained confined to the prima facie stay determination.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Sep 2026 08:48:39 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 Sep 2026 08:48:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=925181" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Natural justice breaches in import-data additions justified staying recovery while appeal remained pending despite deposit guidance.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=104075</link>
      <description>Natural justice was prima facie breached where an unexplained-expenditure addition based on import data was made without meaningful invoice-wise or bill-of-entry-wise particulars. Recorded imports supplied by the assessee exceeded the aggregate data relied on, and apparent duplication in departmental data prevented reconciliation. The High Court treated the addition as raising strong triable issues and stayed recovery pending first appeal, while requiring the appellate authority to decide independently on merits. Administrative directions concerning deposit of a prescribed demand percentage did not fetter the Court&#039;s stay power; Revenue&#039;s insistence on a 20% payment was rejected. The assessment observations remained confined to the prima facie stay determination.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Sep 2026 08:48:39 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=104075</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>