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...
Contraventions under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act were established by seized office documents, export papers, bank enquiries and corroborative witness statements which explained the modus operandi of over invoicing and unauthorised conversion or transfer of Indian currency to persons outside India; the appellant produced no evidence to rebut the seizures and statements, so the violation finding was upheld. The adjudicatory delay was treated as a mitigating factor and, exercising discretion to mitigate penalty for delay, the monetary sanction was reduced to fifty thousand rupees while the finding of contravention remains affirmed.
Contraventions under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act were established by seized office documents, export papers, bank enquiries and corroborative witness statements which explained the modus operandi of over invoicing and unauthorised conversion or transfer of Indian currency to persons outside India; the appellant produced no evidence to rebut the seizures and statements, so the violation finding was upheld. The adjudicatory delay was treated as a mitigating factor and, exercising discretion to mitigate penalty for delay, the monetary sanction was reduced to fifty thousand rupees while the finding of contravention remains affirmed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.