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 held assessment orders passed in name of amalgamating companies void ab initio, despite participation of amalgamated company (RIL) in proceedings. Revenue authorities had prior knowledge of amalgamation yet issued orders against non-existent entities. Following Maruti Suzuki precedent, court determined that once amalgamation is effective, proceedings must be conducted against amalgamated entity. Mere participation by amalgamated company cannot validate assessment orders issued to defunct amalgamating companies. Assessment order dated March 27, 1997, declared legally void, ruling in assessee's favor. Principle affirmed that post-merger assessments must be pursued against surviving amalgamated entity exclusively.
HC held assessment orders passed in name of amalgamating companies void ab initio, despite participation of amalgamated company (RIL) in proceedings. Revenue authorities had prior knowledge of amalgamation yet issued orders against non-existent entities. Following Maruti Suzuki precedent, court determined that once amalgamation is effective, proceedings must be conducted against amalgamated entity. Mere participation by amalgamated company cannot validate assessment orders issued to defunct amalgamating companies. Assessment order dated March 27, 1997, declared legally void, ruling in assessee's favor. Principle affirmed that post-merger assessments must be pursued against surviving amalgamated entity exclusively.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.