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 appeal arose from a dispute regarding the service of a demand notice and the subsequent filing of a petition u/s 95 of the Code. The appellant argued that the period for service of the demand notice should be counted as per Section 95(4)(b) of the Code, disregarding the period mentioned in the guarantee agreement. The Tribunal held that based on Clause 3 of the personal guarantee deed, the guarantor had 60 days from the date of the demand notice to pay the amount. The petition u/s 95 was filed prematurely, within one month of the demand notice, contrary to the agreement. The Tribunal correctly allowed the respondent's application and dismissed the appellant's petition u/s 95, along with imposing costs. The Appellate Tribunal found no merit in the appeal and dismissed it.
The appeal arose from a dispute regarding the service of a demand notice and the subsequent filing of a petition u/s 95 of the Code. The appellant argued that the period for service of the demand notice should be counted as per Section 95(4)(b) of the Code, disregarding the period mentioned in the guarantee agreement. The Tribunal held that based on Clause 3 of the personal guarantee deed, the guarantor had 60 days from the date of the demand notice to pay the amount. The petition u/s 95 was filed prematurely, within one month of the demand notice, contrary to the agreement. The Tribunal correctly allowed the respondent's application and dismissed the appellant's petition u/s 95, along with imposing costs. The Appellate Tribunal found no merit in the appeal and dismissed it.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
