Retrospective cancellation of charitable registration under section 12AB(4) was unsustainable; related-party benefit allegations did not prove nongenu...
Merger control notice and disclosure rules: Supreme Court limits penalties, rejects reopening of approved combination, and sets aside adverse findings...
After admitting an additional ground for deduction under section 32AC, the ITAT held that the appellate authority had to decide the claim on merits and could not refuse it merely because it was raised belatedly or on conduct-based objections already waived at admission. It further held that Goetz India Ltd. did not limit the appellate authority's power to entertain a fresh statutory claim supported by documents and capable of verification. However, because the remand report did not clearly confirm that the assets were new plant and machinery or that all statutory conditions were met, the matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination.
After admitting an additional ground for deduction under section 32AC, the ITAT held that the appellate authority had to decide the claim on merits and could not refuse it merely because it was raised belatedly or on conduct-based objections already waived at admission. It further held that Goetz India Ltd. did not limit the appellate authority's power to entertain a fresh statutory claim supported by documents and capable of verification. However, because the remand report did not clearly confirm that the assets were new plant and machinery or that all statutory conditions were met, the matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.