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...
Subsidy received under the State Mega Project incentive scheme was held revenue in nature because it was linked to electricity duty/stamp duty exemptions and VAT/CST-linked promotion subsidy, not to acquisition of any specific fixed asset; Explanation 10 to section 43(1) was inapplicable and the receipt was taxable as income under section 2(24)(xviii), rejecting the claim of capital receipt/exemption. CPC's prima facie adjustment under section 143(1)(a)(ii) adding the subsidy was upheld since the return contained an apparent mismatch and incomplete exempt-income disclosure, warranting correction, and the first appellate order was reversed. Disallowance of delayed employees' PF/ESIC was remanded to examine the "advance deposit" plea. Alleged understatement of duty drawback was remanded for reconciliation. - ITAT
Subsidy received under the State Mega Project incentive scheme was held revenue in nature because it was linked to electricity duty/stamp duty exemptions and VAT/CST-linked promotion subsidy, not to acquisition of any specific fixed asset; Explanation 10 to section 43(1) was inapplicable and the receipt was taxable as income under section 2(24)(xviii), rejecting the claim of capital receipt/exemption. CPC's prima facie adjustment under section 143(1)(a)(ii) adding the subsidy was upheld since the return contained an apparent mismatch and incomplete exempt-income disclosure, warranting correction, and the first appellate order was reversed. Disallowance of delayed employees' PF/ESIC was remanded to examine the "advance deposit" plea. Alleged understatement of duty drawback was remanded for reconciliation. - ITAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
