Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
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 4782
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
