Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
Merchant banker regulation consolidates registration, governance, capital, reporting, outsourcing and investor-protection requirements under an update...
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.