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 appellant's appeal for failure to comply with the statutory pre-deposit requirement of 7.5% of the penalty under s.129E of the 1962 Act, noting the SC's authority on identical facts and the applicability of the amended provision to pending proceedings. On being asked whether the appellant would make the pre-deposit, counsel confirmed inability to do so; consequently the HC refused to remit the matter to CESTAT for consideration on merits. Given non-compliance with the condition precedent and absence of a prima facie case warranting equitable relief, the appeal is rejected and stands dismissed.
The HC dismissed the appellant's appeal for failure to comply with the statutory pre-deposit requirement of 7.5% of the penalty under s.129E of the 1962 Act, noting the SC's authority on identical facts and the applicability of the amended provision to pending proceedings. On being asked whether the appellant would make the pre-deposit, counsel confirmed inability to do so; consequently the HC refused to remit the matter to CESTAT for consideration on merits. Given non-compliance with the condition precedent and absence of a prima facie case warranting equitable relief, the appeal is rejected and stands dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.