Authentication of paper assessment orders upheld, while qualifying repairs, consumables and vendor advance write-offs remain deductible business claim...
Transaction value cannot be rejected solely on non-statutory valuation guidelines without corroborative evidence supporting reassessment of final cust...
Cross-examination rights and corroborated evidence limit customs penalties for misdeclaration in genuine import transactions involving documented clea...
Page of 4782
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
301 to 320 of 95636 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The ITAT Ahmedabad considered a case involving exemption u/s 11 for a trust with a belatedly filed income return. The tribunal held that the trust, registered u/s 12AA, was eligible for deduction as a charitable trust. It noted the amendment to Section 139(4) post the Finance Act, 2016, allowing filing within one year from the end of the relevant assessment year. The tribunal disagreed with the CIT(A)'s interpretation of the due date. The trust mistakenly reported an amount under the wrong section in the return, but as the filed return was valid and processed u/s 143(1), the CIT(A)'s rejection was deemed unjust. The tribunal also addressed the late filing of form 10B, citing the proviso to section 143(1)(a) and a previous decision condoning such delays. Following the precedent, the tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order, deleted the addition made, and allowed the exemption u/s 11, ultimately ruling in favor of the assessee.
The ITAT Ahmedabad considered a case involving exemption u/s 11 for a trust with a belatedly filed income return. The tribunal held that the trust, registered u/s 12AA, was eligible for deduction as a charitable trust. It noted the amendment to Section 139(4) post the Finance Act, 2016, allowing filing within one year from the end of the relevant assessment year. The tribunal disagreed with the CIT(A)'s interpretation of the due date. The trust mistakenly reported an amount under the wrong section in the return, but as the filed return was valid and processed u/s 143(1), the CIT(A)'s rejection was deemed unjust. The tribunal also addressed the late filing of form 10B, citing the proviso to section 143(1)(a) and a previous decision condoning such delays. Following the precedent, the tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order, deleted the addition made, and allowed the exemption u/s 11, ultimately ruling in favor of the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.