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 case pertains to a provisional attachment order issued u/s 24(4) of the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988, involving a benami transaction. The key points are: The property was purchased before the 2016 amendment, but the benamidar held it even after the amendment. The amending Act's definition of "benami transaction" was not considered by the Adjudicating Authority. The company in whose name the property was purchased lacked the financial capacity to pay the consideration of Rs. 1 crore. Another company, whose ITR reflected the property's address, was found to be holding the property in the name of the first company. Despite not contesting the factual issues, the Appellate Tribunal found reasons to interfere with the impugned order, likely due to the applicability of the amended Act's provisions and the evidence suggesting a benami transaction.
The case pertains to a provisional attachment order issued u/s 24(4) of the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988, involving a benami transaction. The key points are: The property was purchased before the 2016 amendment, but the benamidar held it even after the amendment. The amending Act's definition of "benami transaction" was not considered by the Adjudicating Authority. The company in whose name the property was purchased lacked the financial capacity to pay the consideration of Rs. 1 crore. Another company, whose ITR reflected the property's address, was found to be holding the property in the name of the first company. Despite not contesting the factual issues, the Appellate Tribunal found reasons to interfere with the impugned order, likely due to the applicability of the amended Act's provisions and the evidence suggesting a benami transaction.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
