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...
The MPID Act was held to have overriding effect in a dispute over seized funds linked to investor claims, and the Special Court was found competent to decide release of the money despite seizure under the Income-tax Act and objections based on the PMLA. The Court relied on the direct nexus between the funds and investors' claims, and on the purpose of the MPID Act as protective depositor legislation that cannot be displaced by enactments operating in a different field. It also upheld release of the money to an escrow mechanism for investor restitution, noting that the settlement contemplated that course and that the release was justified on the facts. The appeal was dismissed.
The MPID Act was held to have overriding effect in a dispute over seized funds linked to investor claims, and the Special Court was found competent to decide release of the money despite seizure under the Income-tax Act and objections based on the PMLA. The Court relied on the direct nexus between the funds and investors' claims, and on the purpose of the MPID Act as protective depositor legislation that cannot be displaced by enactments operating in a different field. It also upheld release of the money to an escrow mechanism for investor restitution, noting that the settlement contemplated that course and that the release was justified on the facts. The appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
