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...
Interest on the penalty amount - for the period when the initial order was stayed - The High Court observed that the regulations explicitly required the issuance of a demand notice after the penalty order's stipulated payment period had passed. The court found that this procedural step was not merely directory but mandatory, thus affecting the legality of the interest imposed without following due process. Additionally, the court noted analogous principles from tax law, where the issuance of a demand notice is a precondition for the recovery of sums due under the law. Drawing from these principles, the court underscored that proper legal procedures cannot be bypassed under the guise of procedural simplicity or regulatory power. The impugned order was set aside.
Interest on the penalty amount - for the period when the initial order was stayed - The High Court observed that the regulations explicitly required the issuance of a demand notice after the penalty order's stipulated payment period had passed. The court found that this procedural step was not merely directory but mandatory, thus affecting the legality of the interest imposed without following due process. Additionally, the court noted analogous principles from tax law, where the issuance of a demand notice is a precondition for the recovery of sums due under the law. Drawing from these principles, the court underscored that proper legal procedures cannot be bypassed under the guise of procedural simplicity or regulatory power. The impugned order was set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.