Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
Whether accumulation under s.11(2) disclosed in Form 10 for construction at two schools could be treated as valid application when expenditure was also incurred on other schools run by the same charitable trust. The tribunal held that the trust's sole object was imparting education, and capital and revenue outgo on all schools run by it constituted application of income for charitable purposes; hence, the benefit of s.11(2) could not be denied merely because spending was not confined to the two named projects. However, since the AO noted discrepancies between claimed building expenditure and additions reflected in fixed asset records, allowance was made subject to verification, and the AO was directed to grant the claim upon such verification. - ITAT
Whether accumulation under s.11(2) disclosed in Form 10 for construction at two schools could be treated as valid application when expenditure was also incurred on other schools run by the same charitable trust. The tribunal held that the trust's sole object was imparting education, and capital and revenue outgo on all schools run by it constituted application of income for charitable purposes; hence, the benefit of s.11(2) could not be denied merely because spending was not confined to the two named projects. However, since the AO noted discrepancies between claimed building expenditure and additions reflected in fixed asset records, allowance was made subject to verification, and the AO was directed to grant the claim upon such verification. - ITAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.