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 affirmed that proceedings under FERA are adjudicatory rather than criminal in nature. While the Appellate Tribunal for Foreign Exchange, acting as a quasi-judicial body, has authority to impose penalties for FERA violations, it lacks jurisdiction to pronounce parties "guilty" of offenses. Such determinations of guilt remain exclusively within the purview of competent courts. The tribunal's penalty against appellants was upheld, but the term "guilty" in the 02.06.2016 order was deemed redacted, as pronouncements of guilt carry significant legal implications that exceed the tribunal's administrative and adjudicatory scope.
HC affirmed that proceedings under FERA are adjudicatory rather than criminal in nature. While the Appellate Tribunal for Foreign Exchange, acting as a quasi-judicial body, has authority to impose penalties for FERA violations, it lacks jurisdiction to pronounce parties "guilty" of offenses. Such determinations of guilt remain exclusively within the purview of competent courts. The tribunal's penalty against appellants was upheld, but the term "guilty" in the 02.06.2016 order was deemed redacted, as pronouncements of guilt carry significant legal implications that exceed the tribunal's administrative and adjudicatory scope.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.