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...
AT determined that M/s RK Emporium is not a shell company, and the absence of Benamidars does not create a presumption of impropriety. Despite suspicious circumstances like bank credits during demonetization, the investigation failed to establish evidence of a benami transaction under Section 2(9)(A) of PBPTA. Consequently, the tribunal set aside the impugned order, lifted the provisional attachment of Rs. 1.12 crore from the appellant's bank account, and allowed the appeal, finding insufficient proof to substantiate claims of a benami property transaction.
AT determined that M/s RK Emporium is not a shell company, and the absence of Benamidars does not create a presumption of impropriety. Despite suspicious circumstances like bank credits during demonetization, the investigation failed to establish evidence of a benami transaction under Section 2(9)(A) of PBPTA. Consequently, the tribunal set aside the impugned order, lifted the provisional attachment of Rs. 1.12 crore from the appellant's bank account, and allowed the appeal, finding insufficient proof to substantiate claims of a benami property transaction.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.