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 respondent, a Chartered Accountant, purchased shares in 1997 but denied selling them to the complainant, despite admitting his signatures on the share transfer deed. His explanation of signing a blank transfer deed under the pretext of an unrelated share delivery issue lacked credibility. The respondent failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the four-year delay in applying for duplicate share certificates and continued receiving dividends after the sale, indicating an attempt to benefit from shares he no longer owned. The Disciplinary Committee found the respondent's conduct derogatory and unbecoming of a Chartered Accountant, bringing disrepute to the profession. The High Court upheld the punishment of removing the respondent's name from the Register of Members for six months, finding the decision reasonable and not unduly harsh.
The respondent, a Chartered Accountant, purchased shares in 1997 but denied selling them to the complainant, despite admitting his signatures on the share transfer deed. His explanation of signing a blank transfer deed under the pretext of an unrelated share delivery issue lacked credibility. The respondent failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the four-year delay in applying for duplicate share certificates and continued receiving dividends after the sale, indicating an attempt to benefit from shares he no longer owned. The Disciplinary Committee found the respondent's conduct derogatory and unbecoming of a Chartered Accountant, bringing disrepute to the profession. The High Court upheld the punishment of removing the respondent's name from the Register of Members for six months, finding the decision reasonable and not unduly harsh.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
