Judicial review of settlement orders cannot reopen settled customs notices, while statutory interest remains subject to verification and quantificatio...
Customs Broker licence lending for consideration justified revocation where exporter authorisation and client verification obligations were also breac...
Fraudulent import documents suspend limitation protection, while redemption of confiscated goods requires duty and interest despite bona fide purchase...
ODR arbitration participation remains mandatory after failed conciliation, while jurisdictional and maintainability objections stay available before t...
Transparency in technical bid evaluation requires disclosed standards and recorded reasons; opaque scoring invalidated tender awards and required fres...
Automated export obligation extensions remove separate regional applications after committee approval for Advance Authorisation and EPCG authorisation...
International cargo transhipment through Indian ports continues with Customs-controlled storage, re-export safeguards, and coordinated multi-station m...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
61 to 80 of 96174 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
A genuine donation made by cheque to an approved institution remained substantively eligible for deduction, and the claim could not be refused merely because the wrong deduction provision was quoted. The Tribunal held that a technical misdescription of the provision did not defeat relief where the facts already on record established eligibility and allowing the claim under the correct provision caused no adverse effect on total income. It also recognised that appellate authority could grant the proper relief on the existing material, so the disallowance was unsustainable and was directed to be deleted.
A genuine donation made by cheque to an approved institution remained substantively eligible for deduction, and the claim could not be refused merely because the wrong deduction provision was quoted. The Tribunal held that a technical misdescription of the provision did not defeat relief where the facts already on record established eligibility and allowing the claim under the correct provision caused no adverse effect on total income. It also recognised that appellate authority could grant the proper relief on the existing material, so the disallowance was unsustainable and was directed to be deleted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
