Misdeclaration of quantity rejected where supplier evidence established counting errors, so reassessment, confiscation and redemption fine were set as...
Admissibility of electronic evidence controls valuation and penalty exposure; non compliant e records and statements nullify revaluation and penalties...
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.