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 CESTAT held that a power of attorney (PoA) holder acts solely as an agent of the principal and is not the beneficial owner; the PoA terminates upon the principal's death. Since the sole proprietor was absolved of wrongdoing and no dues were adjudged, reviving proceedings against the PoA holder post the proprietor's death was impermissible. The appeal identified only the proprietorship firm as a respondent, not the PoA holder, precluding liability on the latter. Further, proceedings against the sole proprietorship abate upon the proprietor's death under Rule 22 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982, consistent with precedent holding that demands against deceased proprietors lapse absent enforcement mechanisms. Consequently, the appeal was disposed of, affirming that liability does not survive the proprietor's death and cannot be fastened on the PoA holder.
The CESTAT held that a power of attorney (PoA) holder acts solely as an agent of the principal and is not the beneficial owner; the PoA terminates upon the principal's death. Since the sole proprietor was absolved of wrongdoing and no dues were adjudged, reviving proceedings against the PoA holder post the proprietor's death was impermissible. The appeal identified only the proprietorship firm as a respondent, not the PoA holder, precluding liability on the latter. Further, proceedings against the sole proprietorship abate upon the proprietor's death under Rule 22 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982, consistent with precedent holding that demands against deceased proprietors lapse absent enforcement mechanisms. Consequently, the appeal was disposed of, affirming that liability does not survive the proprietor's death and cannot be fastened on the PoA holder.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.