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...
NCLAT quashed the order dated 10.03.2025 for procedural irregularities in exercising suo motu rectification powers under Rule 154 of NCLT Rules. The Tribunal's rectification order was deemed invalid due to violation of natural justice principles, specifically the audi alteram partem rule, as no notice was issued to parties prior to modifying the original docket order. The appellate tribunal held that substantive rectifications cannot be made without providing an opportunity of hearing to affected parties, emphasizing the critical requirement of procedural fairness in judicial proceedings. Appeal was consequently allowed, setting aside the impugned rectification order.
NCLAT quashed the order dated 10.03.2025 for procedural irregularities in exercising suo motu rectification powers under Rule 154 of NCLT Rules. The Tribunal's rectification order was deemed invalid due to violation of natural justice principles, specifically the audi alteram partem rule, as no notice was issued to parties prior to modifying the original docket order. The appellate tribunal held that substantive rectifications cannot be made without providing an opportunity of hearing to affected parties, emphasizing the critical requirement of procedural fairness in judicial proceedings. Appeal was consequently allowed, setting aside the impugned rectification order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
