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...
Determination of the limitation period for passing final transfer-pricing assessment under section 144C(13) was contested with respect to its interplay with section 153. The tribunal noted higher-court precedent holding the two provisions are interdependent and limitation must be determined with reference to section 144C read with section 153; applying that approach, the tribunal found final assessment orders were passed beyond the applicable limitation period and therefore lacked jurisdiction. Consequently, the impugned final assessment orders were quashed for being time-barred.
Determination of the limitation period for passing final transfer-pricing assessment under section 144C(13) was contested with respect to its interplay with section 153. The tribunal noted higher-court precedent holding the two provisions are interdependent and limitation must be determined with reference to section 144C read with section 153; applying that approach, the tribunal found final assessment orders were passed beyond the applicable limitation period and therefore lacked jurisdiction. Consequently, the impugned final assessment orders were quashed for being time-barred.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.