Religious purpose exclusion versus charitable purpose: non overriding religious objects do not attract Explanation 3, registration directed under sect...
Search-assessment proviso jurisdiction, time-barred valuation reports, and denial of cross-examination vitiate valuation-based and confession-based ad...
Proceeds of crime: provisional attachment confirmed; equivalent value attachment and acquisition date fair market value upheld, Covid exclusion preser...
Refund could not be denied merely because the Chartered Accountant's certificate was not in the prescribed format or did not mention the year, where the lower authority did not question the genuineness of the claim and the defect was only formal. The Tribunal held that the Board circular format was only indicative, not mandatory, and that substantial compliance was sufficient. The rejection of refund on this technical ground was therefore unsustainable. The common appellate order was set aside and the appeals were allowed with consequential benefits as per law.
Refund could not be denied merely because the Chartered Accountant's certificate was not in the prescribed format or did not mention the year, where the lower authority did not question the genuineness of the claim and the defect was only formal. The Tribunal held that the Board circular format was only indicative, not mandatory, and that substantial compliance was sufficient. The rejection of refund on this technical ground was therefore unsustainable. The common appellate order was set aside and the appeals were allowed with consequential benefits as per law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
