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 HC rejected the petitioner's writ petition challenging reopening of tax assessment despite undergoing Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process and NCLT-approved resolution plan. The petitioner engaged in fraudulent transactions involving eight contracts with identical purchase-sale quantities, significant price variations, momentary time gaps between trades, and repeated trading in thinly-traded deep in/out-of-money options, resulting in alleged tax evasion exceeding Rs. 3 crores for AY 2024-15. While recovery proceedings post-resolution plan approval are impermissible, reassessment remains legally permissible. The Court emphasized that CIRP cannot shield deliberate tax evasion or illegalities, and authorities may scrutinize transactions and pursue proceedings against responsible directors. The petition was dismissed, reserving petitioner's rights under Income Tax Act provisions.
The HC rejected the petitioner's writ petition challenging reopening of tax assessment despite undergoing Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process and NCLT-approved resolution plan. The petitioner engaged in fraudulent transactions involving eight contracts with identical purchase-sale quantities, significant price variations, momentary time gaps between trades, and repeated trading in thinly-traded deep in/out-of-money options, resulting in alleged tax evasion exceeding Rs. 3 crores for AY 2024-15. While recovery proceedings post-resolution plan approval are impermissible, reassessment remains legally permissible. The Court emphasized that CIRP cannot shield deliberate tax evasion or illegalities, and authorities may scrutinize transactions and pursue proceedings against responsible directors. The petition was dismissed, reserving petitioner's rights under Income Tax Act provisions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
