Back
PRAKASH GUPTA, SAMEER JAIN
Rajendra Kumar S/o Lt. Shri Manak Chand – Appellant
Versus
Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax – Respondent
ORDER :
SAMEER JAIN, J.
1. Instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner-assessee with the following prayers:-
b. to issue a writ of mandamus restraining the Respondent from initiating any further recovery of outstanding demand for AY 2017-18 until the disposal of appeal challenging the assessment order is pending adjudication before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals);
c. to impose the exemplary costs on Respondent No. 1 for carrying out a blatantly illegal recovery of tax against the accepted principles of reasonableness, judicial discipline and law.
d. by awarding the cost of writ petition in favour of the petitioner;
e. any other order, relief or direction, which this Hon'ble High Court may deem fit & proper be passed in favour of the Petitioner;
2. Facts of the case as borne out from record of the writ petition are that on 13/12/2019 one Assessment Order was passed by the respondent no.1-Assessment Officer (hereinafter referred to as 'AO') under Sectio
Point of Law : Taxation - Lieu of payment of refund tax - Government is bound to follow rules and standards they themselves had set on pain of their action being invalidated.
Tax authorities must adhere to established guidelines for refund adjustments, and deviations require explicit justification.
Adjustment of tax refunds against outstanding dues requires prior intimation and adherence to principles of natural justice as mandated by Section 245 of the Income Tax Act.
Natural justice requires prior intimation before adjusting tax refunds against outstanding dues under Section 245 of the Income Tax Act.
Refunds cannot be adjusted against demands exceeding 20% of the disputed amount, ensuring compliance with pre-deposit norms under taxation laws.
Assessments deemed excessively high must consider genuine hardship, allowing stays without mandatory pre-payment when necessary to protect taxpayer interests.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Commissioner should consider the sufficient cause for the delay in preferring the application under Section 264 of the Income Tax Act, esp....
High Court jurisdiction under Article 226(2) exists if part cause of action (notice receipt, impact on local successor, post-transfer recovery) arises within territory despite outstation authority; t....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
