Invoice-based recovery claims remain time-barred despite separate winding-up proceedings, absent valid acknowledgment or part-payment of the disputed ...
Extended limitation fails without specific suppression allegations, while overseas employee secondment remains taxable as manpower supply within norma...
Time-share accommodation classification excludes Club or Association Service where purchasers receive contractual occupancy rights without genuine mem...
CENVAT credit for trading requires reversal, while taxable-service rental credit remains proportionately available and limitation issues await resolut...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
61 to 80 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" ?
The case involves issues related to exemption u/s. 11, 12 & 13. The appellant lacked registration u/s. 12A, and no pending appeal existed. The status of the appellant as a "State" was scrutinized. The ITAT found the Assessing Officer's interpretation of limiting examination to registration u/s. 12A as flawed. The appellant, a renowned government hospital, was denied benefits due to lack of registration, despite eligibility under other provisions. The ITAT restored the case for fresh assessment, permitting the appellant to raise new claims. Citing Goetze (India) Limited case, the AO was directed to consider any fresh claim, even if not previously raised. The appeals were partly allowed for statistical purposes.
The case involves issues related to exemption u/s. 11, 12 & 13. The appellant lacked registration u/s. 12A, and no pending appeal existed. The status of the appellant as a "State" was scrutinized. The ITAT found the Assessing Officer's interpretation of limiting examination to registration u/s. 12A as flawed. The appellant, a renowned government hospital, was denied benefits due to lack of registration, despite eligibility under other provisions. The ITAT restored the case for fresh assessment, permitting the appellant to raise new claims. Citing Goetze (India) Limited case, the AO was directed to consider any fresh claim, even if not previously raised. The appeals were partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
