Prior Sanction Requirement: absence of prescribed approval invalidates reassessment notice; limitation also bars notice if escaped income below thresh...
Eligibility for exemption depends on strict construction of the product description; reapers without binder are ineligible, but confiscation and penal...
Customs jurisdiction defined for Principal Commissioner, Vishakhapatnam, covering specified ports, districts and India's adjacent EEZ; effective on pu...
A Government company wholly controlled by the State Government through the Governor, with power to appoint and remove directors, was treated as eligible for exemption under section 10(26B) on the basis of its incorporation documents and memorandum and articles of association. The Tribunal followed the co-ordinate bench view in the assessee's own case and accepted that the company was established by the State, so its income was exempt. As the Revenue did not dispute the foundational facts and only raised res judicata, the Tribunal found no error in deleting the additions as non-taxable and upheld the exemption.
A Government company wholly controlled by the State Government through the Governor, with power to appoint and remove directors, was treated as eligible for exemption under section 10(26B) on the basis of its incorporation documents and memorandum and articles of association. The Tribunal followed the co-ordinate bench view in the assessee's own case and accepted that the company was established by the State, so its income was exempt. As the Revenue did not dispute the foundational facts and only raised res judicata, the Tribunal found no error in deleting the additions as non-taxable and upheld the exemption.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.