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...
Validity of order passed u/s 153C read with Section 143(3) - whether question of law can directly be raised before High Court without being averred or pleaded before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT)? Held that as per K. Lubna & Ors. Versus Beevi & Ors. [2020 (1) TMI 1209 - Supreme Court], parties cannot be restrained from raising a question of law even at the last stage of adjudication. In the present case, Revenue raised substantial questions of law which were not decided by ITAT due to lack of averment or arguments before ITAT. Therefore, Court remanded the appeal back to ITAT with direction to decide afresh after giving opportunity of hearing to parties and pass a speaking and well-reasoned order on merits within two months.
Validity of order passed u/s 153C read with Section 143(3) - whether question of law can directly be raised before High Court without being averred or pleaded before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT)? Held that as per K. Lubna & Ors. Versus Beevi & Ors. [2020 (1) TMI 1209 - Supreme Court], parties cannot be restrained from raising a question of law even at the last stage of adjudication. In the present case, Revenue raised substantial questions of law which were not decided by ITAT due to lack of averment or arguments before ITAT. Therefore, Court remanded the appeal back to ITAT with direction to decide afresh after giving opportunity of hearing to parties and pass a speaking and well-reasoned order on merits within two months.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
