Alternative statutory remedy and unexplained delay barred writ review of customs confiscation adjudication, leaving merits for appellate consideration...
Authorised courier due diligence protects against penalties where declared exports conceal prohibited goods despite proper documentation and customs p...
Customs-controlled container movement now extends to DP World facilities, subject to segregation, inspections, reconciliation, and EXIM cargo priority...
The assessee university's application for registration u/s 10(23C)(vi) was rejected due to non-submission of audited accounts and failure to provide necessary information or explanations regarding various queries raised by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions). The key points are: the assessee argued that audited accounts were not required for the first three years as per the applicable statute, but failed to substantiate this claim. The audit clause did not mention any exemption for the first three years. The assessee's contention regarding non-audit due to non-inclusion in the audit list was found untenable as accounts for the subsequent year were audited before the notification date. Regarding vehicle expenses, no plausible explanation or supporting evidence was provided. For examination expenses, the assessee claimed confidentiality but failed to provide relevant information or evidence. Donations received for honouring gold medalists lacked corroborative evidence. Following the Supreme Court's decision in New Noble Education Society, the Appellate Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's rejection order due to the assessee's failure to furnish necessary information and supporting documents.
The assessee university's application for registration u/s 10(23C)(vi) was rejected due to non-submission of audited accounts and failure to provide necessary information or explanations regarding various queries raised by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions). The key points are: the assessee argued that audited accounts were not required for the first three years as per the applicable statute, but failed to substantiate this claim. The audit clause did not mention any exemption for the first three years. The assessee's contention regarding non-audit due to non-inclusion in the audit list was found untenable as accounts for the subsequent year were audited before the notification date. Regarding vehicle expenses, no plausible explanation or supporting evidence was provided. For examination expenses, the assessee claimed confidentiality but failed to provide relevant information or evidence. Donations received for honouring gold medalists lacked corroborative evidence. Following the Supreme Court's decision in New Noble Education Society, the Appellate Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's rejection order due to the assessee's failure to furnish necessary information and supporting documents.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
