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 allowed petitioner's writ petition challenging rejection of benefits under Sabka Vishwas Legacy Dispute Resolution Scheme 2019. Respondents denied benefits solely because scheme deadline had expired, despite petitioner's COVID-related payment difficulties. The HC relied on Supreme Court limitation extension judgments and favorable High Court decisions from Madras, Bombay, Gujarat, and Delhi granting SVLDRS benefits in COVID circumstances, even for post-deadline payments. The court held that denying scheme benefits would contradict the scheme's objective of liquidating past central excise and service tax disputes before GST implementation and would cause injustice to an otherwise eligible declarant. Following Madras HC precedent in N. Sundarajan, the court determined scheme provisions were directive rather than mandatory. The impugned rejection order and demand notices were quashed, with directions issued to accept petitioner's payment and issue discharge certificate.
The HC allowed petitioner's writ petition challenging rejection of benefits under Sabka Vishwas Legacy Dispute Resolution Scheme 2019. Respondents denied benefits solely because scheme deadline had expired, despite petitioner's COVID-related payment difficulties. The HC relied on Supreme Court limitation extension judgments and favorable High Court decisions from Madras, Bombay, Gujarat, and Delhi granting SVLDRS benefits in COVID circumstances, even for post-deadline payments. The court held that denying scheme benefits would contradict the scheme's objective of liquidating past central excise and service tax disputes before GST implementation and would cause injustice to an otherwise eligible declarant. Following Madras HC precedent in N. Sundarajan, the court determined scheme provisions were directive rather than mandatory. The impugned rejection order and demand notices were quashed, with directions issued to accept petitioner's payment and issue discharge certificate.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
