The court held that the officer failed to consider the petitioner's case that the amount received in...

The court held that the officer failed to consider the petitioner's case that the amount received in February 2024 was erroneously described as an advance, which was rectified by filing an amended return. This aspect was not considered while passing the order rejecting the refund claim. Consequently, the order was quashed, and the respondents were directed to reconsider the petitioner's refund application after affording an opportunity of hearing within two months from the date of receipt of the court's judgment. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X