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 ITAT examined a case involving alleged cash receipt for additional amenities in property transfer. The tribunal found that the total sale consideration for row houses was received through banking channels, with no violation of Section 269SS. The additional amounts were for specific interior work and reimbursements, not part of the primary sale consideration. The assessee's statement under Section 132(4) acknowledged receiving Rs. 1,37,73,000 for project-related amenities. After detailed scrutiny of sale agreements and transaction records, the ITAT concluded no specific sum was received contrary to statutory requirements. Consequently, the tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal and held that no penalty under Section 271D was leviable.
The ITAT examined a case involving alleged cash receipt for additional amenities in property transfer. The tribunal found that the total sale consideration for row houses was received through banking channels, with no violation of Section 269SS. The additional amounts were for specific interior work and reimbursements, not part of the primary sale consideration. The assessee's statement under Section 132(4) acknowledged receiving Rs. 1,37,73,000 for project-related amenities. After detailed scrutiny of sale agreements and transaction records, the ITAT concluded no specific sum was received contrary to statutory requirements. Consequently, the tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal and held that no penalty under Section 271D was leviable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
