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...
Customs law did not extend to fasten liability on a foreign exporter for pre-amendment transactions where the exporter was outside India and the relevant amendment to Section 1 operated only prospectively from 29 March 2018. The Act placed post-import compliance and responsibility on the Indian importer, and no legal basis was shown to make the foreign exporter answer for the importers' alleged misdeclaration. Penalties under Sections 112 and 114AA also failed because there was no evidence of any act, omission, abetment, false declaration, or other conduct by the petitioners that satisfied the statutory requirements. On that basis, the show-cause notices were quashed as without jurisdiction.
Customs law did not extend to fasten liability on a foreign exporter for pre-amendment transactions where the exporter was outside India and the relevant amendment to Section 1 operated only prospectively from 29 March 2018. The Act placed post-import compliance and responsibility on the Indian importer, and no legal basis was shown to make the foreign exporter answer for the importers' alleged misdeclaration. Penalties under Sections 112 and 114AA also failed because there was no evidence of any act, omission, abetment, false declaration, or other conduct by the petitioners that satisfied the statutory requirements. On that basis, the show-cause notices were quashed as without jurisdiction.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
