Educational approval requires mandatory State registration, but incidental surplus and trustee-owned land do not prove private benefit or profit motiv...
Judicial review of settlement orders cannot reopen settled customs notices, while statutory interest remains subject to verification and quantificatio...
Customs Broker licence lending for consideration justified revocation where exporter authorisation and client verification obligations were also breac...
Fraudulent import documents suspend limitation protection, while redemption of confiscated goods requires duty and interest despite bona fide purchase...
ODR arbitration participation remains mandatory after failed conciliation, while jurisdictional and maintainability objections stay available before t...
Transparency in technical bid evaluation requires disclosed standards and recorded reasons; opaque scoring invalidated tender awards and required fres...
Automated export obligation extensions remove separate regional applications after committee approval for Advance Authorisation and EPCG authorisation...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
441 to 460 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
A donor claiming weighted deduction for payment to an approved scientific research institution was held entitled to relief where the only basis for disallowance was uncorroborated third-party material about alleged wrongdoing by a donee employee. The Tribunal found that payment was made through banking channels, the donation was duly receipted, and approval under section 35(1)(ii) was on record. It held that the donor was not required to prove actual end-use of the funds once payment to an approved institution was established, and that alleged internal irregularities at the donee could not defeat the claim absent proof of nexus, complicity, sham, or return of funds. The disallowance was deleted.
A donor claiming weighted deduction for payment to an approved scientific research institution was held entitled to relief where the only basis for disallowance was uncorroborated third-party material about alleged wrongdoing by a donee employee. The Tribunal found that payment was made through banking channels, the donation was duly receipted, and approval under section 35(1)(ii) was on record. It held that the donor was not required to prove actual end-use of the funds once payment to an approved institution was established, and that alleged internal irregularities at the donee could not defeat the claim absent proof of nexus, complicity, sham, or return of funds. The disallowance was deleted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.