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...
Faceless assessment scheme does not absorb the statutory preliminary inquiry procedure for reopening; the scheme's plain language excludes that inquiry process, so a notice to reopen may validly be issued by the jurisdictional assessing officer where the requisite inquiry and order were made by that officer. Reading the faceless scheme to incorporate the preliminary inquiry would alter the scheme and render issuance by a faceless officer meaningless. Conflicting views from other High Courts were noted, but the conclusion here is that automated allocation may trigger notice issuance while reassessment proceedings may proceed facelessly; notices issued by jurisdictional officers after April 2022 are upheld as valid.
Faceless assessment scheme does not absorb the statutory preliminary inquiry procedure for reopening; the scheme's plain language excludes that inquiry process, so a notice to reopen may validly be issued by the jurisdictional assessing officer where the requisite inquiry and order were made by that officer. Reading the faceless scheme to incorporate the preliminary inquiry would alter the scheme and render issuance by a faceless officer meaningless. Conflicting views from other High Courts were noted, but the conclusion here is that automated allocation may trigger notice issuance while reassessment proceedings may proceed facelessly; notices issued by jurisdictional officers after April 2022 are upheld as valid.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.