Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
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 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
