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 set aside deletions of additions relating to notional interest on advances to subsidiaries, holding that the assessee's reliance on commercial expediency and its later omission to charge interest had not been properly verified and required fresh examination by the appellate authority. It also held that a bad debt claim could not be allowed without an actual write-off in the accounts after 01.04.1989, with party-wise details and relevant records needed to apply the Supreme Court authorities correctly; that issue was remitted for reconsideration. Relief on the amount debited to the share premium account was likewise set aside because the factual basis for deletion under the actual payment requirement was inadequate, and the matter was remanded to the CIT (Appeals).
The HC set aside deletions of additions relating to notional interest on advances to subsidiaries, holding that the assessee's reliance on commercial expediency and its later omission to charge interest had not been properly verified and required fresh examination by the appellate authority. It also held that a bad debt claim could not be allowed without an actual write-off in the accounts after 01.04.1989, with party-wise details and relevant records needed to apply the Supreme Court authorities correctly; that issue was remitted for reconsideration. Relief on the amount debited to the share premium account was likewise set aside because the factual basis for deletion under the actual payment requirement was inadequate, and the matter was remanded to the CIT (Appeals).
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.