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 CCI dismissed allegations of anti-competitive agreements and abuse of dominant position under Sections 3 and 4 of the Competition Act, 2002. Regarding Section 3, the Commission found no evidence of bid-rigging or cartel behavior between the opposing parties despite allegations of a tacit agreement in tender awarding. For Section 4 claims, the Commission determined that appointment of a Project Management Consultant and issuance of an allegedly faulty Request for Proposal fell within the procurer's legitimate discretion and were not inherently abusive without supporting evidence of statutory violations. Finding no prima facie case of contravention, the Commission closed the matter under Section 26(2) of the Act and rejected the request for interim relief under Section 33.
The CCI dismissed allegations of anti-competitive agreements and abuse of dominant position under Sections 3 and 4 of the Competition Act, 2002. Regarding Section 3, the Commission found no evidence of bid-rigging or cartel behavior between the opposing parties despite allegations of a tacit agreement in tender awarding. For Section 4 claims, the Commission determined that appointment of a Project Management Consultant and issuance of an allegedly faulty Request for Proposal fell within the procurer's legitimate discretion and were not inherently abusive without supporting evidence of statutory violations. Finding no prima facie case of contravention, the Commission closed the matter under Section 26(2) of the Act and rejected the request for interim relief under Section 33.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
