Retrospective cancellation of charitable registration under section 12AB(4) was unsustainable; related-party benefit allegations did not prove nongenu...
Merger control notice and disclosure rules: Supreme Court limits penalties, rejects reopening of approved combination, and sets aside adverse findings...
Reward under the informant guidelines was treated as ex gratia and subject to the competent authority's discretion, with relaxation beyond the prescribed ceiling resting with the Full Board. The informant had accepted that the payment was non-contractual and would not be challenged in court. After re-examining the tax recovery, supplied information and weightage methodology, the Board recalculated the reward and found the earlier recommendation incorrect. The Court declined to substitute its own assessment, holding that writ interference was unavailable absent manifest illegality or patent arbitrariness. The enhanced claim was rejected and the writ petition dismissed.
Reward under the informant guidelines was treated as ex gratia and subject to the competent authority's discretion, with relaxation beyond the prescribed ceiling resting with the Full Board. The informant had accepted that the payment was non-contractual and would not be challenged in court. After re-examining the tax recovery, supplied information and weightage methodology, the Board recalculated the reward and found the earlier recommendation incorrect. The Court declined to substitute its own assessment, holding that writ interference was unavailable absent manifest illegality or patent arbitrariness. The enhanced claim was rejected and the writ petition dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
