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...
HC held that TCS under Section 206C(1C) of IT Act is not applicable to compounding fees collected from illegal miners/transporters under MMDR Act. The court ruled that Section 206C(1C) mandates TCS collection only from lease holders, license holders, or parties with contractual rights in mines who pay royalty to State Government through District Mining Officer. Compounding fees collected under Section 23A of MMDR Act read with Rule 71(5) of Chhattisgarh Minor Mineral Rules, 2015 from illegal mining offenders are distinct from royalty payments. The court emphasized that royalty and compounding fees are mutually exclusive terms with no legislative mandate to collect TCS on compounding fees. ITAT's judgment imposing TCS demand, interest, and penalty was set aside, with substantial question of law decided favoring assessee against Revenue.
HC held that TCS under Section 206C(1C) of IT Act is not applicable to compounding fees collected from illegal miners/transporters under MMDR Act. The court ruled that Section 206C(1C) mandates TCS collection only from lease holders, license holders, or parties with contractual rights in mines who pay royalty to State Government through District Mining Officer. Compounding fees collected under Section 23A of MMDR Act read with Rule 71(5) of Chhattisgarh Minor Mineral Rules, 2015 from illegal mining offenders are distinct from royalty payments. The court emphasized that royalty and compounding fees are mutually exclusive terms with no legislative mandate to collect TCS on compounding fees. ITAT's judgment imposing TCS demand, interest, and penalty was set aside, with substantial question of law decided favoring assessee against Revenue.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
