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...
Maintainability of appeals u/s 377 of CrPC against inadequate sentence was examined. Offences u/s 279-A of IT Act, 1961 are non-cognizable, triable by Magistrate. Special Court for economic offences, presided over by Magistrate, does not qualify as 'any other Court' under clause (b). Appeals against conviction for IT Act offences lie before Sessions Judge u/s 374 CrPC. If High Court allows appeal against inadequate sentence while Sessions Court acquits on appeal against conviction, it may lead to conflicting judgments. To avoid this, appeals against conviction and inadequate sentence must be dealt with simultaneously by the same court as held in Ammannamma case. u/s 377(3) CrPC, accused can plead for acquittal or sentence reduction in appeal against inadequate sentence, without waiting for State's appeal. Accused has statutory right u/s 374(3) CrPC to challenge conviction and sentence. Income Tax Department's appeals u/s 377 CrPC against inadequate sentence are not maintainable and dismissed.
Maintainability of appeals u/s 377 of CrPC against inadequate sentence was examined. Offences u/s 279-A of IT Act, 1961 are non-cognizable, triable by Magistrate. Special Court for economic offences, presided over by Magistrate, does not qualify as 'any other Court' under clause (b). Appeals against conviction for IT Act offences lie before Sessions Judge u/s 374 CrPC. If High Court allows appeal against inadequate sentence while Sessions Court acquits on appeal against conviction, it may lead to conflicting judgments. To avoid this, appeals against conviction and inadequate sentence must be dealt with simultaneously by the same court as held in Ammannamma case. u/s 377(3) CrPC, accused can plead for acquittal or sentence reduction in appeal against inadequate sentence, without waiting for State's appeal. Accused has statutory right u/s 374(3) CrPC to challenge conviction and sentence. Income Tax Department's appeals u/s 377 CrPC against inadequate sentence are not maintainable and dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
