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 dominant issue was whether part of the cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of the Court to entertain a writ challenging anti-dumping final findings on grounds of violation of natural justice and arbitrariness. Applying the test that only facts having a direct nexus with the lis constitute cause of action, the Court held that alleged adverse business impact or commercial engagements within the State were not integral to establishing the asserted infringement of fair procedure under Article 14, and the challenge would survive even if those averments were removed. Consequently, no part of the cause of action arose within its territory, and the writ was not maintainable; the petition was dismissed without examining merits or alternative remedy. - HC
The dominant issue was whether part of the cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of the Court to entertain a writ challenging anti-dumping final findings on grounds of violation of natural justice and arbitrariness. Applying the test that only facts having a direct nexus with the lis constitute cause of action, the Court held that alleged adverse business impact or commercial engagements within the State were not integral to establishing the asserted infringement of fair procedure under Article 14, and the challenge would survive even if those averments were removed. Consequently, no part of the cause of action arose within its territory, and the writ was not maintainable; the petition was dismissed without examining merits or alternative remedy. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.