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 appeal was dismissed for default by CESTAT under Rule 20 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982, after the appellant failed to appear or arrange representation despite service of notice. The Tribunal found no application on record seeking adjudication on merits ex parte and observed that proceeding on merits in the appellant's absence would risk rendering any subsequent order functus officio and depriving the appellant of audi alteram partem. The dismissal was therefore sustained as the appellant manifested no interest in prosecuting the appeal and no sufficient cause for non-appearance was established. The decision leaves open the procedural remedy to seek restoration by demonstrating sufficient cause for non-appearance.
The appeal was dismissed for default by CESTAT under Rule 20 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982, after the appellant failed to appear or arrange representation despite service of notice. The Tribunal found no application on record seeking adjudication on merits ex parte and observed that proceeding on merits in the appellant's absence would risk rendering any subsequent order functus officio and depriving the appellant of audi alteram partem. The dismissal was therefore sustained as the appellant manifested no interest in prosecuting the appeal and no sufficient cause for non-appearance was established. The decision leaves open the procedural remedy to seek restoration by demonstrating sufficient cause for non-appearance.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
