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...
Assessee, a stock broker, claimed deduction for out-of-court settlement amount and legal fees paid for defending a criminal complaint filed by a client. AO disallowed the claim under Explanation 1 to section 37(1). CIT(A) upheld AO's order. On appeal, ITAT observed assessee failed to establish with supporting evidence that the expenditure was civil in nature and allowable. ITAT provided assessee another opportunity to substantiate claim with details. ITAT set aside CIT(A)'s order and restored the issue to AO for fresh adjudication after providing adequate opportunity of hearing to assessee and examining evidence. ITAT allowed assessee's grounds of appeal for statistical purposes.
Assessee, a stock broker, claimed deduction for out-of-court settlement amount and legal fees paid for defending a criminal complaint filed by a client. AO disallowed the claim under Explanation 1 to section 37(1). CIT(A) upheld AO's order. On appeal, ITAT observed assessee failed to establish with supporting evidence that the expenditure was civil in nature and allowable. ITAT provided assessee another opportunity to substantiate claim with details. ITAT set aside CIT(A)'s order and restored the issue to AO for fresh adjudication after providing adequate opportunity of hearing to assessee and examining evidence. ITAT allowed assessee's grounds of appeal for statistical purposes.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.