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...
Whether EPF authorities could initiate/continue assessment under ss. 7A, 7Q and 14B of the EPF Act and raise consequent demands during the s. 14 IBC moratorium, and thereafter enforce such dues against the successful resolution applicant, was decided. The tribunal held that once CIRP commences, moratorium bars initiation or continuation of assessment proceedings that fasten pecuniary liability on the corporate debtor; any demand founded on inspections/assessments undertaken and concluded during moratorium, and not lodged as a claim in CIRP, cannot be enforced even through post-plan notices or summons. Accordingly, the impugned EPF demands were set aside, the successful resolution applicant's appeal was allowed to that extent, and the EPF authority's cross-appeal seeking priority was rejected - NCLAT
Whether EPF authorities could initiate/continue assessment under ss. 7A, 7Q and 14B of the EPF Act and raise consequent demands during the s. 14 IBC moratorium, and thereafter enforce such dues against the successful resolution applicant, was decided. The tribunal held that once CIRP commences, moratorium bars initiation or continuation of assessment proceedings that fasten pecuniary liability on the corporate debtor; any demand founded on inspections/assessments undertaken and concluded during moratorium, and not lodged as a claim in CIRP, cannot be enforced even through post-plan notices or summons. Accordingly, the impugned EPF demands were set aside, the successful resolution applicant's appeal was allowed to that extent, and the EPF authority's cross-appeal seeking priority was rejected - NCLAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.