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 was invalid as AO reopened with non-application of mind and higher authorities granted approval u/s 151 mechanically without verifying facts. Assessee, a non-resident Australian entity, received fees from another non-resident for telecasting rights, not taxable in India. AO erroneously assumed assessee had income generating activities and failed to file return. DRP disposed objections referring to non-filing of TDS return despite AO admitting no remittances or TDS. DRP failed to discharge duties properly by not considering facts and law. Reopening lacked jurisdiction, hence quashed. Decided in assessee's favor.
Reopening of assessment u/s 147 was invalid as AO reopened with non-application of mind and higher authorities granted approval u/s 151 mechanically without verifying facts. Assessee, a non-resident Australian entity, received fees from another non-resident for telecasting rights, not taxable in India. AO erroneously assumed assessee had income generating activities and failed to file return. DRP disposed objections referring to non-filing of TDS return despite AO admitting no remittances or TDS. DRP failed to discharge duties properly by not considering facts and law. Reopening lacked jurisdiction, hence quashed. Decided in assessee's favor.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
