Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
In a charitable institution's assessment, the Tribunal held that application of current-year income and accumulated funds, as separately disclosed in the return and Form 10B and verified in scrutiny, could not be disallowed on a supposed mismatch; once the Assessing Officer recorded that there was no difference between the two, the earlier prima facie adjustment under section 143(1) had no surviving basis and the claim was allowed in full. It also held that no fresh claim was being raised on appeal, so Goetze (India) was inapplicable. The final computation wrongly duplicated the same income components, inflating the taxable base; tax under section 115BBI and interest under sections 234B and 234C were consequential and had to be recomputed. The appeal was allowed.
In a charitable institution's assessment, the Tribunal held that application of current-year income and accumulated funds, as separately disclosed in the return and Form 10B and verified in scrutiny, could not be disallowed on a supposed mismatch; once the Assessing Officer recorded that there was no difference between the two, the earlier prima facie adjustment under section 143(1) had no surviving basis and the claim was allowed in full. It also held that no fresh claim was being raised on appeal, so Goetze (India) was inapplicable. The final computation wrongly duplicated the same income components, inflating the taxable base; tax under section 115BBI and interest under sections 234B and 234C were consequential and had to be recomputed. The appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
