Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
P.SAM KOSHY, NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA
Hyderabad Race Club – Appellant
Versus
Centralized Processing Centre – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's grievance regarding refund adjustment. (Para 2) |
| 2. details of refund and demand for assessment years. (Para 3) |
| 3. legal provisions for demand adjustment. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 4. precedents against full refund adjustments. (Para 7) |
| 5. court's directive on refund and adjustment. (Para 8) |
| 6. conclusion and dismissal of the writ petition. (Para 9) |
ORDER :
P.Sam Koshy, J.
Heard Mr.Avinash Desai, learned Senior Counsel along with Mr.Cuddapah Nanda Gopal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms.J.Sunitha, learned Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department appearing for the respondents. Perused the record.
2. The grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition seems to be the so called adjustment made by the respondent department of the refund outstanding payable to the petitioner for the year 2024-25 against the demand raised for assessment order passed for the assessment year 2022-23.
3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the refund payable to the petitioner in the instant case for the assessment year 2024-25 comes to around Rs.8.96 crores and the demand for the assessment year 2022-23 is Rs.7.25 crores. Meanwhile, the petitioner ha
Adjustments of tax refunds should not exceed 20% of disputed demands, as established in judicial precedents, ensuring taxpayers receive fair treatment.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the adjustment made by the Assessing Officer must comply with the stipulated percentage of the disputed demand as per the relevant provisions ....
Adjustment of tax refunds against pending demands is impermissible when a taxpayer has made partial payment and an appeal is pending, as per the CBDT Circular.
Adjustment of tax refunds against pending demands is impermissible when 20% of the demand has been paid, as per CBDT Circular.
Natural justice requires prior intimation before adjusting tax refunds against outstanding dues under Section 245 of the Income Tax Act.
Refund adjustments under tax laws require mandatory notice and adherence to stay orders; failure to comply results in violation of natural justice.
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.
The court emphasized the importance of allowing the petitioner the full period to respond before making any adjustment under Section 245 of the Income Tax Act.
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
