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 quashed the respondent's order rejecting the petitioner's application for condonation of delay in filing a third revised income tax return claiming a refund. The delay arose from inadvertent errors in the Form 3CD audit report regarding the due dates for provident fund contributions, which were the Chartered Accountant's mistakes. The court held that the petitioner was not responsible for these errors and that the delay should have been condoned under section 119(2)(b) to allow the refund claim under section 36(1)(va). The respondent's reliance solely on Circular No. 9/2015 was found improper. The matter was remanded for a fresh de novo consideration, directing the respondent to condone the delay within twelve weeks, thereby preventing disallowance of the provident fund contributions as time-barred under section 36(1)(v).
The HC quashed the respondent's order rejecting the petitioner's application for condonation of delay in filing a third revised income tax return claiming a refund. The delay arose from inadvertent errors in the Form 3CD audit report regarding the due dates for provident fund contributions, which were the Chartered Accountant's mistakes. The court held that the petitioner was not responsible for these errors and that the delay should have been condoned under section 119(2)(b) to allow the refund claim under section 36(1)(va). The respondent's reliance solely on Circular No. 9/2015 was found improper. The matter was remanded for a fresh de novo consideration, directing the respondent to condone the delay within twelve weeks, thereby preventing disallowance of the provident fund contributions as time-barred under section 36(1)(v).
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
