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...
A plaint seeking declaration of ownership under a Will was held liable to rejection where a meaningful reading showed a benami and unlawful arrangement barred by statute and by the rule that agreements with unlawful objects are void. The Court held that the 2016 amendment to the benami law was curative and procedural, so the machinery for attachment, adjudication, confiscation and appeals applied retrospectively to earlier transactions, while penal consequences remained prospective. It further held that the fiduciary-capacity exception was narrowly confined and inapplicable on the pleaded facts, and that a person could not inherit through a Will while suppressing material facts relating to a murder accusation. The rejection of the plaint was restored.
A plaint seeking declaration of ownership under a Will was held liable to rejection where a meaningful reading showed a benami and unlawful arrangement barred by statute and by the rule that agreements with unlawful objects are void. The Court held that the 2016 amendment to the benami law was curative and procedural, so the machinery for attachment, adjudication, confiscation and appeals applied retrospectively to earlier transactions, while penal consequences remained prospective. It further held that the fiduciary-capacity exception was narrowly confined and inapplicable on the pleaded facts, and that a person could not inherit through a Will while suppressing material facts relating to a murder accusation. The rejection of the plaint was restored.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
