Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
701 to 720 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
In the case before ITAT Mumbai, the issue revolved around the deduction u/s 80G for a charitable trust. The assessee, now assessable as an AOP, had donated an amount exceeding 10% of its gross total income to an approved educational institution. The CIT(A) held that Section 80G(4) does not restrict donations to 10% of total income, allowing 50% deduction. The matter was remanded to verify deductions for entities u/s 80G(3)(a)(iiif). The Tribunal upheld this decision, dismissing the appeal. Additionally, the claim for deduction u/s 80GGA, though not separately mentioned in the return, was considered valid as it was included under Chapter VIA. Lastly, disallowance of carry forward of excess expenditure was deemed irrelevant as the assessee did not claim benefits u/s 11 and 12.
In the case before ITAT Mumbai, the issue revolved around the deduction u/s 80G for a charitable trust. The assessee, now assessable as an AOP, had donated an amount exceeding 10% of its gross total income to an approved educational institution. The CIT(A) held that Section 80G(4) does not restrict donations to 10% of total income, allowing 50% deduction. The matter was remanded to verify deductions for entities u/s 80G(3)(a)(iiif). The Tribunal upheld this decision, dismissing the appeal. Additionally, the claim for deduction u/s 80GGA, though not separately mentioned in the return, was considered valid as it was included under Chapter VIA. Lastly, disallowance of carry forward of excess expenditure was deemed irrelevant as the assessee did not claim benefits u/s 11 and 12.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
