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 dismissed the appeals, holding that the appellants are not entitled to deemed export benefits under Para 8.3 of the FTP. The Court held the Press Release did not constitute "law" under the PPA and, in any event, the relevant Notifications alone could not confer entitlement because the appellants failed to satisfy mandatory prerequisites-notably the ICB requirement for supply of goods at the IPP or EPC stage-and procured components through related entities. The DGFT circulars were characterized as clarificatory and, even if treated as Change in Law, would not confer benefits where preconditions were unmet. No restitutionary relief or compensation was awarded; the APTEL judgment dated 04.07.2017 was affirmed.
The SC dismissed the appeals, holding that the appellants are not entitled to deemed export benefits under Para 8.3 of the FTP. The Court held the Press Release did not constitute "law" under the PPA and, in any event, the relevant Notifications alone could not confer entitlement because the appellants failed to satisfy mandatory prerequisites-notably the ICB requirement for supply of goods at the IPP or EPC stage-and procured components through related entities. The DGFT circulars were characterized as clarificatory and, even if treated as Change in Law, would not confer benefits where preconditions were unmet. No restitutionary relief or compensation was awarded; the APTEL judgment dated 04.07.2017 was affirmed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
