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 held that the requirement of pre-consultation under the CBEC circular for matters involving demands exceeding Rs.50 lakhs is mandatory; absence of effective pre-consultation violated principles of natural justice. The court found the asserted pre-consultation notice was not actually received and that pandemic-related circumstances did not cure the procedural lapse. Consequently, the impugned show cause notice and the consequent original order were quashed and set aside. The Petitioner's challenge was allowed, and the Respondents were granted liberty to initiate and conduct the mandatory pre-consultation afresh in accordance with the circular and applicable law, after which further proceedings may be undertaken.
The HC held that the requirement of pre-consultation under the CBEC circular for matters involving demands exceeding Rs.50 lakhs is mandatory; absence of effective pre-consultation violated principles of natural justice. The court found the asserted pre-consultation notice was not actually received and that pandemic-related circumstances did not cure the procedural lapse. Consequently, the impugned show cause notice and the consequent original order were quashed and set aside. The Petitioner's challenge was allowed, and the Respondents were granted liberty to initiate and conduct the mandatory pre-consultation afresh in accordance with the circular and applicable law, after which further proceedings may be undertaken.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
