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...
DRI officers were held competent to issue SCNs in drawback fraud cases, applying the Tribunal's later precedent upholding DRI jurisdiction; consequently, the challenge to SCN validity failed. Deliberate post-LEO alteration of Bills of Lading to change the port of discharge was treated as fraudulent conduct affecting Customs risk assessment and therefore constituted misdeclaration in the Shipping Bills; accordingly, the export declarations were held tainted. A company was held to fall within "person" by applying the General Clauses Act where the Customs Act is silent; accordingly, corporate liability under s.114 was maintainable in law. However, absent proof of knowing abetment by the customs broker, penalty under s.114(i) was set aside, leaving any lapse to CHALR action. - CESTAT
DRI officers were held competent to issue SCNs in drawback fraud cases, applying the Tribunal's later precedent upholding DRI jurisdiction; consequently, the challenge to SCN validity failed. Deliberate post-LEO alteration of Bills of Lading to change the port of discharge was treated as fraudulent conduct affecting Customs risk assessment and therefore constituted misdeclaration in the Shipping Bills; accordingly, the export declarations were held tainted. A company was held to fall within "person" by applying the General Clauses Act where the Customs Act is silent; accordingly, corporate liability under s.114 was maintainable in law. However, absent proof of knowing abetment by the customs broker, penalty under s.114(i) was set aside, leaving any lapse to CHALR action. - CESTAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.