Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
181 to 200 of 96047 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 Visakhapatnam considered whether the appellant, an entity established under the APSCHE Act, qualifies as an 'instrument of state' u/s Article 12 of the Constitution for tax exemption. The tribunal found that the appellant, under full control of the State Government, meets the criteria of an instrumentality of the government. The concept of 'other authorities' in Article 12 was analyzed, referencing the Supreme Court's tests from the Som Prakash Rekhi case. The tribunal concluded that the appellant, being under the superintendence and control of the State Government, falls within the definition of 'State' u/s Article 12, entitling it to immunity from taxation. The appellant's appeal was allowed, emphasizing full tax exemption for its income and receipts.
The ITAT Visakhapatnam considered whether the appellant, an entity established under the APSCHE Act, qualifies as an 'instrument of state' u/s Article 12 of the Constitution for tax exemption. The tribunal found that the appellant, under full control of the State Government, meets the criteria of an instrumentality of the government. The concept of 'other authorities' in Article 12 was analyzed, referencing the Supreme Court's tests from the Som Prakash Rekhi case. The tribunal concluded that the appellant, being under the superintendence and control of the State Government, falls within the definition of 'State' u/s Article 12, entitling it to immunity from taxation. The appellant's appeal was allowed, emphasizing full tax exemption for its income and receipts.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.