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...
Assessment proceedings and consequent demand and penalty notices issued in the name of an amalgamating/transferor company are void once a court-sanctioned scheme of amalgamation has taken effect because the transferor ceases to exist; continuing proceedings in the name of the dissolved entity therefore involve a jurisdictional error. The High Court applied the principle that proceedings must be in the name of the existing legal entity, relied on prior authoritative decisions (distinguishing contrary facts), and quashed the impugned notices and order while noting the Revenue may initiate fresh proceedings against the amalgamated company if legally entitled.
Assessment proceedings and consequent demand and penalty notices issued in the name of an amalgamating/transferor company are void once a court-sanctioned scheme of amalgamation has taken effect because the transferor ceases to exist; continuing proceedings in the name of the dissolved entity therefore involve a jurisdictional error. The High Court applied the principle that proceedings must be in the name of the existing legal entity, relied on prior authoritative decisions (distinguishing contrary facts), and quashed the impugned notices and order while noting the Revenue may initiate fresh proceedings against the amalgamated company if legally entitled.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
