Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
The HC allowed the petitioner's claim for accumulation under s.11(2) despite delayed formalities, exercising powers under s.119(2)(b) to condone delay and grant exemption. The court found denial would cause genuine hardship because the accumulated funds were already applied to the trust's objects in AY 2020-21 and substantive statutory requirements (board resolution, Form 10B audit report, timely-filed return) were satisfied. The HC distinguished authority relied upon by the revenue as fact-specific and inapplicable, noting no change in the petitioner's claim. Relief was therefore granted, preventing tax recovery arising from denial of the accumulation benefit.
The HC allowed the petitioner's claim for accumulation under s.11(2) despite delayed formalities, exercising powers under s.119(2)(b) to condone delay and grant exemption. The court found denial would cause genuine hardship because the accumulated funds were already applied to the trust's objects in AY 2020-21 and substantive statutory requirements (board resolution, Form 10B audit report, timely-filed return) were satisfied. The HC distinguished authority relied upon by the revenue as fact-specific and inapplicable, noting no change in the petitioner's claim. Relief was therefore granted, preventing tax recovery arising from denial of the accumulation benefit.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.