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...
ITAT set aside CIT(A)'s order regarding addition under s.69A for unexplained cash deposits. CIT(A) failed to fulfill statutory obligations under s.250(6) by not providing reasoned determination of appeal points and merely noting assessee's non-compliance with notices. The dismissal lacked merit-based adjudication and proper examination of appeal grounds. Additionally, while advance tax payment was required under s.249(4), CIT(A) neither specified the payable amount nor considered that assessee could seek exemption. Matter remanded for fresh consideration with directions to allow assessee to file advance tax exemption application. CIT(A) directed to pass speaking order addressing merits and grounds raised, following established precedents requiring substantive adjudication of appeals.
ITAT set aside CIT(A)'s order regarding addition under s.69A for unexplained cash deposits. CIT(A) failed to fulfill statutory obligations under s.250(6) by not providing reasoned determination of appeal points and merely noting assessee's non-compliance with notices. The dismissal lacked merit-based adjudication and proper examination of appeal grounds. Additionally, while advance tax payment was required under s.249(4), CIT(A) neither specified the payable amount nor considered that assessee could seek exemption. Matter remanded for fresh consideration with directions to allow assessee to file advance tax exemption application. CIT(A) directed to pass speaking order addressing merits and grounds raised, following established precedents requiring substantive adjudication of appeals.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
