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...
CESTAT held that the show-cause notice seeking revocation of the customs broker licence and penalty was jurisdictionally defective because it did not state the date of receipt of the offence report as mandated by Regulation 20(1) of the CBLR 2013, a time limit treated as mandatory. Consequently, proceedings and consequential adverse findings premised on that notice are quashed to the extent they resulted in forfeiture of the broker's security deposit. The Tribunal declined to examine merits in view of the jurisdictional infirmity, set aside the impugned forfeiture order insofar as it affected the anonymized customs broker, and dismissed the appeal preferred by the Revenue.
CESTAT held that the show-cause notice seeking revocation of the customs broker licence and penalty was jurisdictionally defective because it did not state the date of receipt of the offence report as mandated by Regulation 20(1) of the CBLR 2013, a time limit treated as mandatory. Consequently, proceedings and consequential adverse findings premised on that notice are quashed to the extent they resulted in forfeiture of the broker's security deposit. The Tribunal declined to examine merits in view of the jurisdictional infirmity, set aside the impugned forfeiture order insofar as it affected the anonymized customs broker, and dismissed the appeal preferred by the Revenue.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.