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 upheld the Tribunal's refusal to rectify the assessment under s.254(2), concluding the Tribunal's power is confined to correcting mistakes apparent on the record and does not extend to rehearing or reviewing its own decision. No mistake apparent from the record was shown; the assessment dated 24.12.2007, issued after the Appellant's 2005 return and following non-compliance with multiple AO notices, did not cause demonstrable prejudice. The Tribunal and CIT(A) afforded full opportunity to be heard, considered merits across three rounds of litigation, and dismissed the rectification application. Given the Appellant's failure to challenge the Tribunal's 31.10.2019 order on merits, HC declined further relief and dismissed the challenge.
HC upheld the Tribunal's refusal to rectify the assessment under s.254(2), concluding the Tribunal's power is confined to correcting mistakes apparent on the record and does not extend to rehearing or reviewing its own decision. No mistake apparent from the record was shown; the assessment dated 24.12.2007, issued after the Appellant's 2005 return and following non-compliance with multiple AO notices, did not cause demonstrable prejudice. The Tribunal and CIT(A) afforded full opportunity to be heard, considered merits across three rounds of litigation, and dismissed the rectification application. Given the Appellant's failure to challenge the Tribunal's 31.10.2019 order on merits, HC declined further relief and dismissed the challenge.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
