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...
Revision under section 263 was invoked on the ground that the assessment under section 153C read with section 143(3) concerning alleged cash payment for purchase of development rights was erroneous and prejudicial. It was held that prior administrative approval under section 153D does not bar revision, since the statutory scheme permits the PCIT to revise an assessment order notwithstanding such approval. On merits, the assessment was found to be based on enquiries, verification of documents and evidences, and a plausible view, including consideration of a witness statement denying linkage of seized notings to the assessee; the Revenue also failed to identify any specific unmade enquiry or incriminating material directly implicating the assessee. Consequently, the revision order was set aside and the appeal was allowed - ITAT
Revision under section 263 was invoked on the ground that the assessment under section 153C read with section 143(3) concerning alleged cash payment for purchase of development rights was erroneous and prejudicial. It was held that prior administrative approval under section 153D does not bar revision, since the statutory scheme permits the PCIT to revise an assessment order notwithstanding such approval. On merits, the assessment was found to be based on enquiries, verification of documents and evidences, and a plausible view, including consideration of a witness statement denying linkage of seized notings to the assessee; the Revenue also failed to identify any specific unmade enquiry or incriminating material directly implicating the assessee. Consequently, the revision order was set aside and the appeal was allowed - ITAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
