Charitable trust income application permits verified capital expenditure but rejects deferred pre-operative claims and requires reconsideration of con...
Reinsurance premium deductions require established regulatory breaches, while independently acquired software qualifies within the computer depreciati...
Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
An existing trust had previously been granted approval u/ss 12AA and 80G of the Income Tax Act. However, instead of applying under clause (i) of the proviso to Section 80G, which is applicable for existing trusts, it incorrectly applied under clause (iii) as a new trust. Clause (i) does not require any provisional approval, and the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner would have granted approval for five years upon written application. The controversy arose due to the incorrect mention of clause (iv) instead of clause (i) in Form No. 10AC, which the assessee admitted was an error. Since Form No. 10AC was filed on time, the incorrect clause mention is considered a curable defect. The order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) is set aside, and they are required to consider the application as filed under clause (i) of the first proviso to Section 80G(5) and grant approval accordingly. The assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
An existing trust had previously been granted approval u/ss 12AA and 80G of the Income Tax Act. However, instead of applying under clause (i) of the proviso to Section 80G, which is applicable for existing trusts, it incorrectly applied under clause (iii) as a new trust. Clause (i) does not require any provisional approval, and the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner would have granted approval for five years upon written application. The controversy arose due to the incorrect mention of clause (iv) instead of clause (i) in Form No. 10AC, which the assessee admitted was an error. Since Form No. 10AC was filed on time, the incorrect clause mention is considered a curable defect. The order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) is set aside, and they are required to consider the application as filed under clause (i) of the first proviso to Section 80G(5) and grant approval accordingly. The assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
