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 appellant wrongly relied upon the Amanjyot Singh case and changed stance during final arguments, having earlier contended the 26.05.2016 notice invoked personal guarantee. The Amanjyot Singh case involved Section 13(2) notice to corporate debtor and guarantors jointly by Punjab and Sind Bank on 04.10.2023. Section 18 provides for acknowledgement in writing, and the balance sheet indicating liability is such acknowledgement. The balance sheet signed by appellants on 01.09.2017 indicates debt from that date as per Supreme Court's Asset Reconstruction Company case. Counting limitation from 26.05.2016 to 01.09.2017, three years would restart from 01.09.2017 and end on 31.08.2020, which fell during COVID-19 period extended by Supreme Court till 01.03.2022 plus 90 days. Hence, the 02.12.2021 Section 95 application by Respondent 1 was within limitation. The appeals lack merit and are dismissed.
The appellant wrongly relied upon the Amanjyot Singh case and changed stance during final arguments, having earlier contended the 26.05.2016 notice invoked personal guarantee. The Amanjyot Singh case involved Section 13(2) notice to corporate debtor and guarantors jointly by Punjab and Sind Bank on 04.10.2023. Section 18 provides for acknowledgement in writing, and the balance sheet indicating liability is such acknowledgement. The balance sheet signed by appellants on 01.09.2017 indicates debt from that date as per Supreme Court's Asset Reconstruction Company case. Counting limitation from 26.05.2016 to 01.09.2017, three years would restart from 01.09.2017 and end on 31.08.2020, which fell during COVID-19 period extended by Supreme Court till 01.03.2022 plus 90 days. Hence, the 02.12.2021 Section 95 application by Respondent 1 was within limitation. The appeals lack merit and are dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
