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 reassessment proceedings initiated under s.147 for AY 2014-15. AO's reliance solely on insight portal information regarding transactions with ASE Capital Markets Ltd was deemed mechanical and without independent application of mind. The assessee had fully disclosed F&O losses of Rs.41,56,218 in original return, accepted under s.143(3). AO failed to explain why only Rs.27,61,650 was considered non-genuine. No tangible material or verification supported the reopening, and AO's belief was based on borrowed satisfaction without considering existing assessment records. Court found no failure by assessee to disclose material facts, making reopening after four years unjustified as it merely reflected change of opinion.
HC invalidated reassessment proceedings initiated under s.147 for AY 2014-15. AO's reliance solely on insight portal information regarding transactions with ASE Capital Markets Ltd was deemed mechanical and without independent application of mind. The assessee had fully disclosed F&O losses of Rs.41,56,218 in original return, accepted under s.143(3). AO failed to explain why only Rs.27,61,650 was considered non-genuine. No tangible material or verification supported the reopening, and AO's belief was based on borrowed satisfaction without considering existing assessment records. Court found no failure by assessee to disclose material facts, making reopening after four years unjustified as it merely reflected change of opinion.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
