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 SC held that an application before the Settlement Commission pending decision requires an order under section 245D(4) of the 1961 Act. Section 245HA applies only if the settlement application is rejected without terms, thereby reviving appellate proceedings. The Revenue's contention that the assessee must forfeit the right to contest the assessment on merits upon such rejection was rejected as misconceived. Given the facts, the ITAT rightly condoned the delay, set aside the CIT(A)'s order, and restored the first appeal. Consequently, the special leave petition was dismissed, affirming the continuation of appellate remedy despite the pending settlement application.
The SC held that an application before the Settlement Commission pending decision requires an order under section 245D(4) of the 1961 Act. Section 245HA applies only if the settlement application is rejected without terms, thereby reviving appellate proceedings. The Revenue's contention that the assessee must forfeit the right to contest the assessment on merits upon such rejection was rejected as misconceived. Given the facts, the ITAT rightly condoned the delay, set aside the CIT(A)'s order, and restored the first appeal. Consequently, the special leave petition was dismissed, affirming the continuation of appellate remedy despite the pending settlement application.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
