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...
Page of 4798
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
341 to 360 of 95957 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
ITAT allowed the appeal filed by the assessee-trust, holding that the earlier dismissal was based on a patent mistake in applying s.12AA. ITAT observed that the assessee already held a valid registration under s.12AA at the time of filing the return for the relevant assessment year, and the amended registration regime, effective from 01.04.2021, was inapplicable to that year. Further, the assessee had subsequently obtained registration under the amended provisions on 28.03.2022, reinforcing its eligible status. ITAT held that CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal for non-furnishing of a new registration number and misapplication of amended law. Consequently, ITAT directed the AO to delete the demand raised by CPC, thereby granting full relief to the assessee.
ITAT allowed the appeal filed by the assessee-trust, holding that the earlier dismissal was based on a patent mistake in applying s.12AA. ITAT observed that the assessee already held a valid registration under s.12AA at the time of filing the return for the relevant assessment year, and the amended registration regime, effective from 01.04.2021, was inapplicable to that year. Further, the assessee had subsequently obtained registration under the amended provisions on 28.03.2022, reinforcing its eligible status. ITAT held that CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal for non-furnishing of a new registration number and misapplication of amended law. Consequently, ITAT directed the AO to delete the demand raised by CPC, thereby granting full relief to the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.