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 CESTAT dismissed the Restoration of Appeals filed by M/s Himachal Fashion Pvt Ltd. The appellant failed to appear for hearings despite being offered seven opportunities. The appellant waited for one year after withdrawal of the earlier advocate's Vakalatnama to appoint a new advocate. The CESTAT held that Restoration of Appeal is not a matter of right and is permitted only in exceptional cases with valid reasons, which the appellant failed to provide. The CESTAT decided the case on merits based on the Appeal Memorandum and was not required to offer more than three adjournments as per the Customs Act. The appellant's lack of interest in agitating the appeals led to the dismissal.
The CESTAT dismissed the Restoration of Appeals filed by M/s Himachal Fashion Pvt Ltd. The appellant failed to appear for hearings despite being offered seven opportunities. The appellant waited for one year after withdrawal of the earlier advocate's Vakalatnama to appoint a new advocate. The CESTAT held that Restoration of Appeal is not a matter of right and is permitted only in exceptional cases with valid reasons, which the appellant failed to provide. The CESTAT decided the case on merits based on the Appeal Memorandum and was not required to offer more than three adjournments as per the Customs Act. The appellant's lack of interest in agitating the appeals led to the dismissal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
