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 ITAT upheld the validity of reopening of assessment u/s 147 despite the existence of Section 153C pertaining to assessments following search and seizure operations. It relied on the precedent PCIT vs Naveen Gupta, which held that the non-obstante clause in Section 153C does not bar reassessment u/s 147. The ITAT found merit in the revenue's arguments that the AO had tangible material and recorded reasons for initiating reassessment proceedings, and its jurisdiction could not be challenged at this stage as per Abhishek Jain. The ITAT dismissed the assessee's contentions regarding lack of notice and overseas detention. Regarding penalty u/s 271(1)(c), the ITAT upheld the levy, citing the Supreme Court's decision in MAK Data (P) Limited, as the assessee failed to provide a reasonable explanation for concealment of income.
The ITAT upheld the validity of reopening of assessment u/s 147 despite the existence of Section 153C pertaining to assessments following search and seizure operations. It relied on the precedent PCIT vs Naveen Gupta, which held that the non-obstante clause in Section 153C does not bar reassessment u/s 147. The ITAT found merit in the revenue's arguments that the AO had tangible material and recorded reasons for initiating reassessment proceedings, and its jurisdiction could not be challenged at this stage as per Abhishek Jain. The ITAT dismissed the assessee's contentions regarding lack of notice and overseas detention. Regarding penalty u/s 271(1)(c), the ITAT upheld the levy, citing the Supreme Court's decision in MAK Data (P) Limited, as the assessee failed to provide a reasonable explanation for concealment of income.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
