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 SC held that Respondent No. 1, a society registered to promote welfare of NOIDA residents, had locus standi to file the writ petition challenging imposition of toll/user fees by NTBCL on DND Flyway. The delay was condoned as commuters trusted NOIDA to protect their interests initially. Judicial intervention was justified given the public interest involved. Selection of NTBCL without bidding violated Article 14. NOIDA lacked real choice in extending the concession period due to unreasonably escalated project cost calculated to make repayment impossible. NTBCL recovered project cost and profits through illegal toll/fees. No opinion on outdoor advertisement dues as it was outside the scope of appeal. The HC judgment restraining toll/fees was upheld.
The SC held that Respondent No. 1, a society registered to promote welfare of NOIDA residents, had locus standi to file the writ petition challenging imposition of toll/user fees by NTBCL on DND Flyway. The delay was condoned as commuters trusted NOIDA to protect their interests initially. Judicial intervention was justified given the public interest involved. Selection of NTBCL without bidding violated Article 14. NOIDA lacked real choice in extending the concession period due to unreasonably escalated project cost calculated to make repayment impossible. NTBCL recovered project cost and profits through illegal toll/fees. No opinion on outdoor advertisement dues as it was outside the scope of appeal. The HC judgment restraining toll/fees was upheld.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
