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...
Challenge to assessment as violative of s.144B/CBDT instructions and for denial of opportunity failed because statutory notices were issued, the proposed disallowance was communicated, and no specific prejudice from refusal of evidence or arbitrary denial of adjournment was shown; hence the assessment was not void. Disallowance in principle of excess cane price over FRP could not be rejected merely on broad claims, as no cost-based justification or contemporaneous material was produced to show the entire differential was commercially driven; however, the impugned quantification did not follow the Tasgaon methodology and was not sustainable. For the year in question, deduction of the final cane price was allowable in full under s.36(1)(xvii) due to unrebutted State Government approval, rendering further profit-embedded segregation unnecessary; sustained disallowance was deleted and set-off of brought-forward depreciation was directed. - ITAT
Challenge to assessment as violative of s.144B/CBDT instructions and for denial of opportunity failed because statutory notices were issued, the proposed disallowance was communicated, and no specific prejudice from refusal of evidence or arbitrary denial of adjournment was shown; hence the assessment was not void. Disallowance in principle of excess cane price over FRP could not be rejected merely on broad claims, as no cost-based justification or contemporaneous material was produced to show the entire differential was commercially driven; however, the impugned quantification did not follow the Tasgaon methodology and was not sustainable. For the year in question, deduction of the final cane price was allowable in full under s.36(1)(xvii) due to unrebutted State Government approval, rendering further profit-embedded segregation unnecessary; sustained disallowance was deleted and set-off of brought-forward depreciation was directed. - ITAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.