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 ITAT, an Appellate Tribunal, considered the issue of levy of penalty u/s 271B for failure to submit audit report u/s 44AB on time. The Tribunal noted that the penalty order did not mention prior approval of the Joint Commissioner, as required. Citing SAGAR DUTTA case, it held that the absence of such approval renders the order incompetent and a nullity. The Tribunal set aside the penalty orders totaling Rs. 150,000, stating they were passed without requisite approval. The appeal by the assessee was allowed, with the option for the revenue to approach the Tribunal if prior approval was later proven.
The ITAT, an Appellate Tribunal, considered the issue of levy of penalty u/s 271B for failure to submit audit report u/s 44AB on time. The Tribunal noted that the penalty order did not mention prior approval of the Joint Commissioner, as required. Citing SAGAR DUTTA case, it held that the absence of such approval renders the order incompetent and a nullity. The Tribunal set aside the penalty orders totaling Rs. 150,000, stating they were passed without requisite approval. The appeal by the assessee was allowed, with the option for the revenue to approach the Tribunal if prior approval was later proven.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.