The authority ruled that absence of a loan does not waive compliance obligations. Failure to intimate satisfaction of charge attracted mandatory penalties.
Regulatory authorities held that claiming compliance with accounting standards without actual adherence or explanation violates Section 134. Companies and directors can face fixed penalties even without mala fide intent.
The adjudicating authority held that delayed appointment of a woman director constitutes a continuing default warranting financial penalties.
The issue was whether an unsecured loan could be treated as unexplained despite evidence on record. ITAT Delhi held that the appellate authority erred in ignoring uploaded documents and remanded the matter for fresh verification.
The Tribunal held that reassessment based only on the Shah Commission report, without independent material or application of mind, is invalid. Reopening beyond four years after full disclosure was quashed, nullifying additions and penalties.
ITAT Delhi ruled that annual revenue-linked DTH licence fees are revenue expenses under Section 37, not capital under Section 35ABB, allowing full deduction for the assessee.
The Tribunal held that income assessment issues cannot prevent granting registration under section 12AB, directing the renewal for a trust already registered under 12AA.
The ROC held that failure to appoint a woman director within the prescribed period violates section 149(1). Monetary penalties were imposed despite later rectification of the default.
The issue concerned an upward transfer pricing adjustment on corporate guarantee fees charged to AEs. The Tribunal upheld the fee at 0.25% as arm’s length, citing prior ITAT precedents. The takeaway: valid comparable data and indemnification protect against such adjustments.
The Tribunal held that revenue-sharing license fees under the 1999 policy are capital expenditure, mandatorily amortizable under section 35ABB, following the Supreme Court verdict.
