Service of notice and contractual debt acknowledgment preserved insolvency admission against a corporate guarantor despite limitation and natural just...
Original works exemption excludes standalone boulder transportation, leaving subcontracted railway-project transport services subject to service tax l...
Annual production capacity determinations excluding stenter galleries support refunds for unconstitutional excise levies without an unjust-enrichment ...
Vicarious liability for cheque dishonour requires specific allegations of responsibility and cheque signatory; generic director allegations cannot sus...
IT Resilience Index requires market infrastructure institutions to automate resilience scoring, early warnings, and continuous service-delivery monito...
This is an order from the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) regarding the rejection of final registration u/s 80G(5)(iii) of the Income Tax Act. The key points are: The assessee filed the Form 10AB for final registration u/s 80G beyond the prescribed time limit. However, the ITAT held that the application was filed within the stipulated period of six months from the date of provisional registration and is not barred by limitation. The requirement of filing within six months of commencement of activities is not applicable as the assessee had commenced activities before seeking provisional registration. The ITAT relied on CBDT Circular No. 07/2024, which allowed fresh applications in certain cases where the application was rejected solely due to delay or wrong section code. Considering the intent and spirit of the circular, the ITAT remitted the matter to the CIT(E) to admit the assessee's application and examine it on merits. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.
This is an order from the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) regarding the rejection of final registration u/s 80G(5)(iii) of the Income Tax Act. The key points are: The assessee filed the Form 10AB for final registration u/s 80G beyond the prescribed time limit. However, the ITAT held that the application was filed within the stipulated period of six months from the date of provisional registration and is not barred by limitation. The requirement of filing within six months of commencement of activities is not applicable as the assessee had commenced activities before seeking provisional registration. The ITAT relied on CBDT Circular No. 07/2024, which allowed fresh applications in certain cases where the application was rejected solely due to delay or wrong section code. Considering the intent and spirit of the circular, the ITAT remitted the matter to the CIT(E) to admit the assessee's application and examine it on merits. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
