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...
TDS on leave fare concession payments was disputed where the assessee bank had treated the benefit as exempt, but employees had undertaken foreign-leg journeys. Although the substantive exemption under section 10(5) was found against the assessee, the Tribunal held that liability as an assessee in default could not be fastened for the relevant period because binding interim High Court directions governed deduction of tax on LFC payments. Non-deduction in compliance with those judicial orders did not attract the rigours of section 201(1) or consequential interest under section 201(1A), and the subsequent Supreme Court ruling could not retrospectively create that default. The demand and interest were deleted.
TDS on leave fare concession payments was disputed where the assessee bank had treated the benefit as exempt, but employees had undertaken foreign-leg journeys. Although the substantive exemption under section 10(5) was found against the assessee, the Tribunal held that liability as an assessee in default could not be fastened for the relevant period because binding interim High Court directions governed deduction of tax on LFC payments. Non-deduction in compliance with those judicial orders did not attract the rigours of section 201(1) or consequential interest under section 201(1A), and the subsequent Supreme Court ruling could not retrospectively create that default. The demand and interest were deleted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
