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 dismissed the writ petition challenging the rejection of a request for disclosure of third-party information under Section 138(1)(b) of the IT Act. The petitioner sought information regarding tax evasion proceedings against his father-in-law to use as evidence in a criminal case under Section 498-A IPC initiated by his ex-wife. The court held that such information does not qualify as being in the public interest and that the petitioner had already been furnished relevant information under the RTI Act. The impugned order was found to be reasoned and valid, emphasizing that disclosure of tax evasion details against a third party for use in criminal proceedings is impermissible. The petitioner was advised to rely on the information already provided under the RTI Act, and the petition was dismissed for lack of merit.
The HC dismissed the writ petition challenging the rejection of a request for disclosure of third-party information under Section 138(1)(b) of the IT Act. The petitioner sought information regarding tax evasion proceedings against his father-in-law to use as evidence in a criminal case under Section 498-A IPC initiated by his ex-wife. The court held that such information does not qualify as being in the public interest and that the petitioner had already been furnished relevant information under the RTI Act. The impugned order was found to be reasoned and valid, emphasizing that disclosure of tax evasion details against a third party for use in criminal proceedings is impermissible. The petitioner was advised to rely on the information already provided under the RTI Act, and the petition was dismissed for lack of merit.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
