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...
Vicarious liability of directors under the Negotiable Instruments framework was affirmed, with the court applying the statutory presumption in favor of the complainant where cheques bore the director's signature, making a prima facie case for prosecution at the summoning stage; consequence: summoning orders not quashed. The contention of violation of bank mandate, alleged forgery, and mastermind/fraud were held to be triable factual defenses that must be tested at trial and do not negate prima facie liability. The High Court also rejected parallel forum approach and abuse of process by petitioners, noting inherent jurisdiction should be exercised sparingly when revisional remedies exist.
Vicarious liability of directors under the Negotiable Instruments framework was affirmed, with the court applying the statutory presumption in favor of the complainant where cheques bore the director's signature, making a prima facie case for prosecution at the summoning stage; consequence: summoning orders not quashed. The contention of violation of bank mandate, alleged forgery, and mastermind/fraud were held to be triable factual defenses that must be tested at trial and do not negate prima facie liability. The High Court also rejected parallel forum approach and abuse of process by petitioners, noting inherent jurisdiction should be exercised sparingly when revisional remedies exist.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.