Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal observed that the amendments made to the Trust deed were minor and did not affect the substance or spirit of the original deed. The objects in the original Trust deed were broad enough to cover a range of charitable activities. The Tribunal held that the Trust was not required to file an application for re-registration due to such amendments. The CIT(E) erred in cancelling the registration without finding any deviation in the Trust's activities or questioning the genuineness of its activities, as required u/s 12AB(1)(b). Relying on the Supreme Court's decision in CIT(E) vs. Paramount Charity Trust, the Tribunal quashed the CIT(E)'s order and directed granting registration to the Trust, as non-communication of the amendment was a mere irregularity and not a ground for cancellation.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal observed that the amendments made to the Trust deed were minor and did not affect the substance or spirit of the original deed. The objects in the original Trust deed were broad enough to cover a range of charitable activities. The Tribunal held that the Trust was not required to file an application for re-registration due to such amendments. The CIT(E) erred in cancelling the registration without finding any deviation in the Trust's activities or questioning the genuineness of its activities, as required u/s 12AB(1)(b). Relying on the Supreme Court's decision in CIT(E) vs. Paramount Charity Trust, the Tribunal quashed the CIT(E)'s order and directed granting registration to the Trust, as non-communication of the amendment was a mere irregularity and not a ground for cancellation.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.