Overlapping GST proceedings require Central and State authorities to designate one competent authority for coordinated adjudication of the same matter...
Composite healthcare supplies retain exemption when patient care is the contract's essential character, despite payment through an implementing agency...
Receipt of immovable property requires actual possession or enjoyment; redevelopment allotments exchanged for tenancy rights fall outside deemed incom...
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.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
