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...
HC dismissed petition challenging penalty proceedings under s271DA. AO initiated proceedings via reference to Addl. CIT within 11 days of assessment order completion (08.04.2024), following assessment order dated 28.03.2024. Six-month limitation period commenced from reference date. Court held timing reasonable, rejecting petitioner's argument of arbitrary extension. While acknowledging that inordinate delays require scrutiny and reasonable timeframe applies where no specific limitation exists, HC found 11-day gap between assessment completion and penalty initiation well within acceptable bounds. Proceedings deemed within limitation period prescribed under s275(1)(c).
HC dismissed petition challenging penalty proceedings under s271DA. AO initiated proceedings via reference to Addl. CIT within 11 days of assessment order completion (08.04.2024), following assessment order dated 28.03.2024. Six-month limitation period commenced from reference date. Court held timing reasonable, rejecting petitioner's argument of arbitrary extension. While acknowledging that inordinate delays require scrutiny and reasonable timeframe applies where no specific limitation exists, HC found 11-day gap between assessment completion and penalty initiation well within acceptable bounds. Proceedings deemed within limitation period prescribed under s275(1)(c).
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
