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 HC held that revision under section 264 is maintainable against a penalty order under section 270A even if the order is otherwise appealable, because the bar in section 264(4) is limited to the specific situations stated there. The Principal Commissioner therefore wrongly declined to examine the revision on merits. On the penalty, the Court found no under-reported income where the PF/ESI disallowance had already been added in the section 143(1)(a) intimation and the assessment merely repeated the same addition; the statutory ingredients of section 270A were not met. The assessee also made full disclosure and advanced a bona fide claim, attracting the section 270A(6)(a) exception. The revisional and penalty orders were quashed.
The HC held that revision under section 264 is maintainable against a penalty order under section 270A even if the order is otherwise appealable, because the bar in section 264(4) is limited to the specific situations stated there. The Principal Commissioner therefore wrongly declined to examine the revision on merits. On the penalty, the Court found no under-reported income where the PF/ESI disallowance had already been added in the section 143(1)(a) intimation and the assessment merely repeated the same addition; the statutory ingredients of section 270A were not met. The assessee also made full disclosure and advanced a bona fide claim, attracting the section 270A(6)(a) exception. The revisional and penalty orders were quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
