SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

DELHI HIGH COURT
MANMOHAN, NAVIN CHAWLA
Religare Finvest Limited – Appellant
Versus
Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax – Respondent


Table of Content
1. petitioner seeks tax refund for excess demand. (Para 1)
2. conditions for tax demand stay outlined. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
3. notice accepted; revenue counsel unprepared. (Para 6 , 7)
4. court reiterates procedure for tax demand adjustments. (Para 8 , 9)
5. court orders refund of excess tax adjustment. (Para 10 , 11 , 12)

JUDGMENT

Manmohan, J. (Oral)--The hearing has been done by way of video conferencing.

1. Present writ petitions have been filed seeking refund of the Income Tax (including interest) adjusted in excess of 20% of the disputed tax demand arising in the case of the Petitioner for the assessment years 2016-17 and 2017-18 against the refunds due for the Assessments Years 2018-19 and 2019-20 along with the applicable interest. Petitioner also seeks direction to the respondent to dispose of the application dated 10th July, 2020 filed by the Petitioner under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [for short `the Act'] seeking rectification of the assessment order dated 17th June, 2020 for the Assessment Year 2016-17.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that under Section 220(6) of the Act, the Assessing Officer has been conferred with the power to

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top