Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
Sabka Vishwas (Legacy) Dispute Resolution Scheme, 2019 - SVLDRS - delay in payment due to adjustment of amounts paid by the insurance company against the payment under the scheme - The stand of the Respondents in this regard is clearly hyper technical and arbitrary. The further stand of the Respondents that the last date for payment has expired on 30.09.2020 is also not acceptable. The delay in receiving payment is on account of the refusal of the Respondent No.3 to adjust the compensation amount payable by the 6th Respondent against the crystallised due under the scheme. The 6th Respondent had also issued the discharge voucher on 29.9.2020 and as such it cannot be said that the offer to pay had not been made before the last date. - HC
Sabka Vishwas (Legacy) Dispute Resolution Scheme, 2019 - SVLDRS - delay in payment due to adjustment of amounts paid by the insurance company against the payment under the scheme - The stand of the Respondents in this regard is clearly hyper technical and arbitrary. The further stand of the Respondents that the last date for payment has expired on 30.09.2020 is also not acceptable. The delay in receiving payment is on account of the refusal of the Respondent No.3 to adjust the compensation amount payable by the 6th Respondent against the crystallised due under the scheme. The 6th Respondent had also issued the discharge voucher on 29.9.2020 and as such it cannot be said that the offer to pay had not been made before the last date. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
