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 allowed appeal and confirmed attachment of respondent chartered accountant's bank account containing Rs. 3,34,585.89. Respondent claimed funds represented legitimate professional fees for issuing project completion certificates to Tayal Group companies. AT rejected good faith defense, finding respondent professionally negligent in relying on fabricated documents supplied by loan defaulters without independent verification. Such negligence enabled bank fraud against UCO Bank and constituted either blind faith or collusion with accused persons. AT held professional negligence cannot justify claiming attached amounts as legitimate fees. Adjudicating Authority erred in refusing to confirm provisional attachment order based solely on professional fees argument without considering underlying negligence. Funds prima facie represented proceeds of crime under money laundering provisions.
AT allowed appeal and confirmed attachment of respondent chartered accountant's bank account containing Rs. 3,34,585.89. Respondent claimed funds represented legitimate professional fees for issuing project completion certificates to Tayal Group companies. AT rejected good faith defense, finding respondent professionally negligent in relying on fabricated documents supplied by loan defaulters without independent verification. Such negligence enabled bank fraud against UCO Bank and constituted either blind faith or collusion with accused persons. AT held professional negligence cannot justify claiming attached amounts as legitimate fees. Adjudicating Authority erred in refusing to confirm provisional attachment order based solely on professional fees argument without considering underlying negligence. Funds prima facie represented proceeds of crime under money laundering provisions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
