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 doctrine of merger was examined concerning the jurisdiction of the respondent to adjudicate stamp duty u/ss 31 and 33 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. The respondent's power u/s 47A(3) to examine instruments for correctness of value or duty payable is barred by the two-year limitation period from the instrument's registration date. The petitioner filed the merger order on 07.12.2011, but the respondent issued a show-cause notice on 20.03.2014, beyond the two-year period. The Delhi Towers Ltd. case held that court orders are subject to stamp duty, and the definition of 'conveyance' u/s 2(10) is inclusive. However, as the petitioner and ACIPL were wholly-owned subsidiaries of a common parent company, the merger order was exempt from stamp duty under Notification no. 13 dated 25.12.1937. The show-cause notice and impugned order were quashed, and the petition was allowed.
The doctrine of merger was examined concerning the jurisdiction of the respondent to adjudicate stamp duty u/ss 31 and 33 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. The respondent's power u/s 47A(3) to examine instruments for correctness of value or duty payable is barred by the two-year limitation period from the instrument's registration date. The petitioner filed the merger order on 07.12.2011, but the respondent issued a show-cause notice on 20.03.2014, beyond the two-year period. The Delhi Towers Ltd. case held that court orders are subject to stamp duty, and the definition of 'conveyance' u/s 2(10) is inclusive. However, as the petitioner and ACIPL were wholly-owned subsidiaries of a common parent company, the merger order was exempt from stamp duty under Notification no. 13 dated 25.12.1937. The show-cause notice and impugned order were quashed, and the petition was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
