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...
The reassessment proceedings were initiated against a non-resident individual deriving income from other sources after three years had elapsed. The sanction of the Specified Authority was not obtained as per the prevalent law. Information was received regarding possible infringement of section 56(2)(vii) related to transactions of immovable property. The Tribunal held that the sanction of the Specified Authority was mandatory and not obtained in conformity with the law. Additionally, the notice u/s 148 was time-barred as per section 149 since it was issued after three years, and the amount alleged to have escaped assessment was less than Rs. 50 lakh. Consequently, the notice issued u/s 148 was void ab initio and bad in law, and the decision was in favor of the assessee.
The reassessment proceedings were initiated against a non-resident individual deriving income from other sources after three years had elapsed. The sanction of the Specified Authority was not obtained as per the prevalent law. Information was received regarding possible infringement of section 56(2)(vii) related to transactions of immovable property. The Tribunal held that the sanction of the Specified Authority was mandatory and not obtained in conformity with the law. Additionally, the notice u/s 148 was time-barred as per section 149 since it was issued after three years, and the amount alleged to have escaped assessment was less than Rs. 50 lakh. Consequently, the notice issued u/s 148 was void ab initio and bad in law, and the decision was in favor of the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
