Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
Transfer pricing and tax deductions upheld on established principles, while employee contributions and warranty provisions returned for fresh examinat...
Captive transfer pricing relies on industrial consumer tariffs, while genuine quotations can benchmark effluent treatment transfers under the Other Me...
Specific tariff classification for ophthalmic instruments and extended limitation principles determine the treatment of duty demands, confiscation, an...
Page of 4816
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1461 to 1480 of 96301 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.