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...
Reassessment for disallowing higher depreciation on computer software was held time-barred because the original scrutiny assessment was based on a full and true disclosure, and the Revenue relied only on the same return, financials, and depreciation statement without any subsequent tangible material; hence the proviso to s.147 could not extend limitation and reopening amounted to impermissible review. Consequently, limitation was reckoned from the original assessment date, as the later s.143(3) r/w s.263 order dealt only with s.10A/10B computation and did not merge on the depreciation issue, rendering the reopening without jurisdiction. On merits, computer software was eligible for 60% depreciation under the then-existing "computers" entry, as no separate software entry existed pre-AY 2003-04, so the higher rate was allowable. - HC
Reassessment for disallowing higher depreciation on computer software was held time-barred because the original scrutiny assessment was based on a full and true disclosure, and the Revenue relied only on the same return, financials, and depreciation statement without any subsequent tangible material; hence the proviso to s.147 could not extend limitation and reopening amounted to impermissible review. Consequently, limitation was reckoned from the original assessment date, as the later s.143(3) r/w s.263 order dealt only with s.10A/10B computation and did not merge on the depreciation issue, rendering the reopening without jurisdiction. On merits, computer software was eligible for 60% depreciation under the then-existing "computers" entry, as no separate software entry existed pre-AY 2003-04, so the higher rate was allowable. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.