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...
The HC quashed reassessment proceedings initiated against a dissolved partnership firm. The Assessing Officer had erroneously issued notice under s.148A(b) and passed order under s.148A(d) in the name of the partnership firm that had been dissolved effective April 1, 2017. The Court held that such proceedings were untenable, particularly since the petitioner had provided all relevant information including the dissolution deed in response to the show cause notice. Following the precedent established in Maruti Suzuki Limited, the Court determined that reassessment notices issued in the name of a non-existent entity cannot be sustained, and accordingly set aside the impugned notice and order.
The HC quashed reassessment proceedings initiated against a dissolved partnership firm. The Assessing Officer had erroneously issued notice under s.148A(b) and passed order under s.148A(d) in the name of the partnership firm that had been dissolved effective April 1, 2017. The Court held that such proceedings were untenable, particularly since the petitioner had provided all relevant information including the dissolution deed in response to the show cause notice. Following the precedent established in Maruti Suzuki Limited, the Court determined that reassessment notices issued in the name of a non-existent entity cannot be sustained, and accordingly set aside the impugned notice and order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.