Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
Transfer pricing and tax deductions upheld on established principles, while employee contributions and warranty provisions returned for fresh examinat...
Captive transfer pricing relies on industrial consumer tariffs, while genuine quotations can benchmark effluent treatment transfers under the Other Me...
Specific tariff classification for ophthalmic instruments and extended limitation principles determine the treatment of duty demands, confiscation, an...
Integrated golf function determines classification, placing launch monitors and simulators under other golf equipment rather than measuring instrument...
The High Court examined the validity of an assessment order issued without offering a personal hearing, deeming it a breach of natural justice. The case was transferred from the National Faceless Assessment Center to the jurisdictional AO u/s 144B(8). The respondent rejected the petitioner's request for a hearing via video conference due to purported lack of functionality, contrary to provisions in section 144B and a CBDT circular. The court found the respondent's claim baseless as the circular mandated a hearing either via video conference or in a designated area. The petitioner's right to a hearing was upheld, dismissing the respondent's argument of alternative appeal options. The assessment order was annulled, and the matter was remanded for a proper hearing in line with the CBDT circular.
The High Court examined the validity of an assessment order issued without offering a personal hearing, deeming it a breach of natural justice. The case was transferred from the National Faceless Assessment Center to the jurisdictional AO u/s 144B(8). The respondent rejected the petitioner's request for a hearing via video conference due to purported lack of functionality, contrary to provisions in section 144B and a CBDT circular. The court found the respondent's claim baseless as the circular mandated a hearing either via video conference or in a designated area. The petitioner's right to a hearing was upheld, dismissing the respondent's argument of alternative appeal options. The assessment order was annulled, and the matter was remanded for a proper hearing in line with the CBDT circular.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
