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...
Customs broker's license revocation and forfeiture of security deposit due to alleged overvaluation of imported rough diamonds faced procedural irregularities. CESTAT observed respondent's request for cross-examination of persons whose statements implicated respondent was denied without specific grounds, violating principles of natural justice and Regulation 17(4) of CBLR requiring reasons for denial. CESTAT noted allegations of telephonic conversations lacked evidence of respondent's active role in overvaluation. Department failed to comply with CBLR provisions when cross-examination was requested, forming the sole ground for allowing appeal. Neither proposed questions nor grounds raised this issue, leading to appeal dismissal.
Customs broker's license revocation and forfeiture of security deposit due to alleged overvaluation of imported rough diamonds faced procedural irregularities. CESTAT observed respondent's request for cross-examination of persons whose statements implicated respondent was denied without specific grounds, violating principles of natural justice and Regulation 17(4) of CBLR requiring reasons for denial. CESTAT noted allegations of telephonic conversations lacked evidence of respondent's active role in overvaluation. Department failed to comply with CBLR provisions when cross-examination was requested, forming the sole ground for allowing appeal. Neither proposed questions nor grounds raised this issue, leading to appeal dismissal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
