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 invalidated search and seizure operations conducted at petitioner's residence under PMLA, 2002. Court held that mere suspicion of money laundering without substantive evidence violates statutory procedural safeguards. Despite proper authorization from Joint Director, the search lacked "reason to believe" standard required under Section 17(1). No prima facie evidence established petitioner's involvement in predicate offense of illegal site allotments during MUDA commissioner tenure. Subsequent summons under Section 50 and recorded statements were quashed as they stemmed from illegal search. Court emphasized protection of liberty and privacy rights under Article 21, granting petitioner liberty to pursue action under Section 62 PMLA for vexatious search.
HC invalidated search and seizure operations conducted at petitioner's residence under PMLA, 2002. Court held that mere suspicion of money laundering without substantive evidence violates statutory procedural safeguards. Despite proper authorization from Joint Director, the search lacked "reason to believe" standard required under Section 17(1). No prima facie evidence established petitioner's involvement in predicate offense of illegal site allotments during MUDA commissioner tenure. Subsequent summons under Section 50 and recorded statements were quashed as they stemmed from illegal search. Court emphasized protection of liberty and privacy rights under Article 21, granting petitioner liberty to pursue action under Section 62 PMLA for vexatious search.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
