Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
The ITAT held that salary paid by a charitable trust to its Chairperson was not excessive where the Department had accepted similar remuneration in earlier and later years, so the disallowance under section 13(2)(c) was deleted. It also found that repairs to rented premises used by the trust were commercially expedient and that no personal benefit to a specified person had been shown, so that addition was deleted as well. On the separate appellate issue, the Tribunal held that the CIT(A) had failed to consider the assessee's written submissions, additional evidence and Rule 46A application, amounting to a natural justice defect, and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication after reasonable opportunity.
The ITAT held that salary paid by a charitable trust to its Chairperson was not excessive where the Department had accepted similar remuneration in earlier and later years, so the disallowance under section 13(2)(c) was deleted. It also found that repairs to rented premises used by the trust were commercially expedient and that no personal benefit to a specified person had been shown, so that addition was deleted as well. On the separate appellate issue, the Tribunal held that the CIT(A) had failed to consider the assessee's written submissions, additional evidence and Rule 46A application, amounting to a natural justice defect, and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication after reasonable opportunity.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.