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...
Validity of faceless assessment challenged due to non-compliance with Section 151A - notices issued by Joint Assessing Officer (JAO) instead of Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO). High Court held that JAO lacked jurisdiction to issue notices u/s 148, particularly in view of Section 151A read with Central Government notification dated 29 March 2022. Relying on Hexaware Technologies Ltd. case, the Court ruled the impugned notices illegal and invalid as JAO had no jurisdiction. Petition allowed in favor of assessee.
Validity of faceless assessment challenged due to non-compliance with Section 151A - notices issued by Joint Assessing Officer (JAO) instead of Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO). High Court held that JAO lacked jurisdiction to issue notices u/s 148, particularly in view of Section 151A read with Central Government notification dated 29 March 2022. Relying on Hexaware Technologies Ltd. case, the Court ruled the impugned notices illegal and invalid as JAO had no jurisdiction. Petition allowed in favor of assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.