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...
Capital gains on a slump sale under section 50B were recomputed to allow reduction of capital work-in-progress that had been inadvertently omitted from the original working. The Tribunal noted that the assessee had already offered the slump sale gain in the original return, explained the omission during assessment, and showed the asset consistently in earlier balance sheets. As the Assessing Officer rejected the claim only because it was not made through a revised return, without disputing its factual correctness or adducing contrary material, the correction could not be denied on that procedural ground. The appellate order allowing the recomputation was upheld.
Capital gains on a slump sale under section 50B were recomputed to allow reduction of capital work-in-progress that had been inadvertently omitted from the original working. The Tribunal noted that the assessee had already offered the slump sale gain in the original return, explained the omission during assessment, and showed the asset consistently in earlier balance sheets. As the Assessing Officer rejected the claim only because it was not made through a revised return, without disputing its factual correctness or adducing contrary material, the correction could not be denied on that procedural ground. The appellate order allowing the recomputation was upheld.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.