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...
In an appeal by a convicted director/authorised signatory under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the NI Act where the company could not be proceeded against due to a legal impediment, the Court examined whether an appellate deposit under Section 148 can be directed against such individual. It held that the appellate court must not impose the 20% deposit mechanically and must consider exceptional circumstances, including that the appellant may not be the "drawer"; accordingly, the condition directing deposit was quashed and suspension of sentence was restored on bond. However, noting conflicting interpretations on whether Section 148 is confined to the juristic drawer in all such scenarios, the question was referred for decision by a Larger Bench. - SC
In an appeal by a convicted director/authorised signatory under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the NI Act where the company could not be proceeded against due to a legal impediment, the Court examined whether an appellate deposit under Section 148 can be directed against such individual. It held that the appellate court must not impose the 20% deposit mechanically and must consider exceptional circumstances, including that the appellant may not be the "drawer"; accordingly, the condition directing deposit was quashed and suspension of sentence was restored on bond. However, noting conflicting interpretations on whether Section 148 is confined to the juristic drawer in all such scenarios, the question was referred for decision by a Larger Bench. - SC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
