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...
HC held that the petitioner cannot re-challenge notices issued under ss. 148A(b), 148A(d) and 148, which ought to have been agitated before the DRP; having been directed earlier to raise those issues before the DRP, the petitioner did so but failed to inform the Assessing Officer, whereupon the AO, acting under s.144C, validly passed the final assessment order. In the interests of justice, however, the HC set aside the final assessment order, the demand notice under s.156 read with the issue letter, and the DRP order rejecting objections, and directed revival of the petitioner's objections before the DRP for adjudication on merits. The HC found no fault with the AO's procedural conduct.
HC held that the petitioner cannot re-challenge notices issued under ss. 148A(b), 148A(d) and 148, which ought to have been agitated before the DRP; having been directed earlier to raise those issues before the DRP, the petitioner did so but failed to inform the Assessing Officer, whereupon the AO, acting under s.144C, validly passed the final assessment order. In the interests of justice, however, the HC set aside the final assessment order, the demand notice under s.156 read with the issue letter, and the DRP order rejecting objections, and directed revival of the petitioner's objections before the DRP for adjudication on merits. The HC found no fault with the AO's procedural conduct.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.