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 High Court declined to issue general directions to all Motor Accident Claims Tribunals in Gujarat regarding the uniform procedure for deduction of TDS in MACP compensation cases. The petitioner had deducted TDS and obtained a certificate from the Income Tax Department, but the Court's previous decision held that such deduction may be contrary to law. However, the Court observed that at the relevant time when the petitioner deducted TDS u/s 194A(3) of the Income Tax Act, the Court's decision was not available. While the Tribunals are bound by the Court's decision, the Court cannot issue blanket directions as each case's facts differ. The petitioner has the liberty to challenge individual orders contrary to the Court's decision. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
The High Court declined to issue general directions to all Motor Accident Claims Tribunals in Gujarat regarding the uniform procedure for deduction of TDS in MACP compensation cases. The petitioner had deducted TDS and obtained a certificate from the Income Tax Department, but the Court's previous decision held that such deduction may be contrary to law. However, the Court observed that at the relevant time when the petitioner deducted TDS u/s 194A(3) of the Income Tax Act, the Court's decision was not available. While the Tribunals are bound by the Court's decision, the Court cannot issue blanket directions as each case's facts differ. The petitioner has the liberty to challenge individual orders contrary to the Court's decision. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
