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 ITAT set aside ex parte appellate orders dismissing the assessee's appeals as time barred, holding that delay should not defeat consideration where the challenge goes to the jurisdiction to levy late fee under section 234E for the period before 1 June 2015. Following the Kerala High Court decision in Jiji Varghese, the Tribunal held that the first appellate authority ought to have condoned the delay and heard the appeals on merits. It did not decide the validity of the levy itself and remanded the matters for fresh adjudication after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of hearing.
The ITAT set aside ex parte appellate orders dismissing the assessee's appeals as time barred, holding that delay should not defeat consideration where the challenge goes to the jurisdiction to levy late fee under section 234E for the period before 1 June 2015. Following the Kerala High Court decision in Jiji Varghese, the Tribunal held that the first appellate authority ought to have condoned the delay and heard the appeals on merits. It did not decide the validity of the levy itself and remanded the matters for fresh adjudication after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of hearing.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.