Retrospective cancellation of charitable registration under section 12AB(4) was unsustainable; related-party benefit allegations did not prove nongenu...
Merger control notice and disclosure rules: Supreme Court limits penalties, rejects reopening of approved combination, and sets aside adverse findings...
Page of 4807
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2741 to 2760 of 96140 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 Delhi addressed two key issues. Firstly, on disallowance of provision for leave encashment, the AO rejected the claim as it was not made through a revised return. The Tribunal held that deduction can only be allowed when actual payment is made u/s 43B(f) of the Act, citing a Supreme Court ruling. AO directed to verify actual payment date. Secondly, on taxability of excise duty subsidy, the Tribunal ruled it as capital receipt based on earlier decisions, holding it non-taxable. Additional ground raised by the assessee was allowed.
The ITAT Delhi addressed two key issues. Firstly, on disallowance of provision for leave encashment, the AO rejected the claim as it was not made through a revised return. The Tribunal held that deduction can only be allowed when actual payment is made u/s 43B(f) of the Act, citing a Supreme Court ruling. AO directed to verify actual payment date. Secondly, on taxability of excise duty subsidy, the Tribunal ruled it as capital receipt based on earlier decisions, holding it non-taxable. Additional ground raised by the assessee was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.