Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
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.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4826 
Join Channel 
