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...
Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - Disallowance of CSR amount u/s 37(2) - reason to believe or suspect - tangible material to reopen - AO power to review not to be confused with the power to re-assess - The petitioner argued that the notice was based on a change of opinion and lacked fresh tangible material. They also contested the treatment of CSR expenses and claimed that their practice was lawful. The High Court ruled in favor of the petitioner, holding that the notice for reopening the assessment was invalid and unsustainable, and the treatment of CSR expenses was permissible under the law. - The Court agreed with the petitioner's contention that donations made to eligible trusts, even if funded by CSR, qualified for deduction under Section 80G of the Act
Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - Disallowance of CSR amount u/s 37(2) - reason to believe or suspect - tangible material to reopen - AO power to review not to be confused with the power to re-assess - The petitioner argued that the notice was based on a change of opinion and lacked fresh tangible material. They also contested the treatment of CSR expenses and claimed that their practice was lawful. The High Court ruled in favor of the petitioner, holding that the notice for reopening the assessment was invalid and unsustainable, and the treatment of CSR expenses was permissible under the law. - The Court agreed with the petitioner's contention that donations made to eligible trusts, even if funded by CSR, qualified for deduction under Section 80G of the Act
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.