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...
Import of branded goods in the name of fictitious entities - Misdeclaration and undervaluation - rejection of request for cross examination of the witness - during the course of investigation and while considering the entire matter, the Adjudicating Authority has been able to bring out the facts as to how the appellant has impersonated himself, opened bank account in the name of a fictitious person, remitted customs duty by effecting cash payment in dummy bank accounts, opened in the name of an Enterprise and one person. Therefore, the facts and circumstances of the case would clearly show that the request for cross examination is devoid of merits, lacks bonafide and rightly denied by the Adjudicating Authority. - HC
Import of branded goods in the name of fictitious entities - Misdeclaration and undervaluation - rejection of request for cross examination of the witness - during the course of investigation and while considering the entire matter, the Adjudicating Authority has been able to bring out the facts as to how the appellant has impersonated himself, opened bank account in the name of a fictitious person, remitted customs duty by effecting cash payment in dummy bank accounts, opened in the name of an Enterprise and one person. Therefore, the facts and circumstances of the case would clearly show that the request for cross examination is devoid of merits, lacks bonafide and rightly denied by the Adjudicating Authority. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
