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...
The High Court addressed the issue of entry tax collection from a company on packing materials entering Assam for goods packing. The Court noted that Section 50 allows refund if tax is overpaid. Rule 29 sets a timeframe for refund application in Form 37, with provision for condoning delays. Referring to a previous case, the Court found no entry tax on packing materials, suggesting overpayment by the petitioner. The Court held that the petitioner must exhaust the refund process u/s 50 before seeking relief, allowing a one-month window to apply for refund. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
The High Court addressed the issue of entry tax collection from a company on packing materials entering Assam for goods packing. The Court noted that Section 50 allows refund if tax is overpaid. Rule 29 sets a timeframe for refund application in Form 37, with provision for condoning delays. Referring to a previous case, the Court found no entry tax on packing materials, suggesting overpayment by the petitioner. The Court held that the petitioner must exhaust the refund process u/s 50 before seeking relief, allowing a one-month window to apply for refund. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.