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...
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 4827 
Join Channel 
