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...
Clandestine removal of excisable goods - Penalty u/r 26 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 imposed on Managing Director. Appellant challenged Order upholding penalty without specifying applicable clause of Rule 26. Held: Rule 26 penalty can be levied on any person concerned in removing excisable goods liable for confiscation, without confiscation proposal or order. Appellant's statement admitted involvement. Adjudicating authority not required to specify sub-rule as sub-rule (2) inapplicable. Appellant put on notice regarding nature of contravention. Co-operative principle not violated. Concurrent findings of fact by lower authorities. No substantial question of law arises. Appeals dismissed.
Clandestine removal of excisable goods - Penalty u/r 26 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 imposed on Managing Director. Appellant challenged Order upholding penalty without specifying applicable clause of Rule 26. Held: Rule 26 penalty can be levied on any person concerned in removing excisable goods liable for confiscation, without confiscation proposal or order. Appellant's statement admitted involvement. Adjudicating authority not required to specify sub-rule as sub-rule (2) inapplicable. Appellant put on notice regarding nature of contravention. Co-operative principle not violated. Concurrent findings of fact by lower authorities. No substantial question of law arises. Appeals dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
