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 held that the offence in question is compoundable and the pendency of a criminal prosecution does not preclude the filing of a compounding application nor impose a limitation period based on the contested guidelines. The Court invalidated Clause 7(ii) of the relevant guideline as ultra vires the statute, relying on its prior ruling in Jayashree v. CBDT. Consequently, the HC set aside the 2nd respondent's rejection order and remanded the matter for reconsideration. The 2nd respondent is directed to admit the compounding application submitted on 15.09.2023 and decide it on merits in accordance with law, without regard to the limitation period prescribed in the struck-down clause.
The HC held that the offence in question is compoundable and the pendency of a criminal prosecution does not preclude the filing of a compounding application nor impose a limitation period based on the contested guidelines. The Court invalidated Clause 7(ii) of the relevant guideline as ultra vires the statute, relying on its prior ruling in Jayashree v. CBDT. Consequently, the HC set aside the 2nd respondent's rejection order and remanded the matter for reconsideration. The 2nd respondent is directed to admit the compounding application submitted on 15.09.2023 and decide it on merits in accordance with law, without regard to the limitation period prescribed in the struck-down clause.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
