Religious purpose exclusion versus charitable purpose: non overriding religious objects do not attract Explanation 3, registration directed under sect...
Search-assessment proviso jurisdiction, time-barred valuation reports, and denial of cross-examination vitiate valuation-based and confession-based ad...
Proceeds of crime: provisional attachment confirmed; equivalent value attachment and acquisition date fair market value upheld, Covid exclusion preser...
Section 79 did not bar the set off of brought forward business losses where the persons beneficially holding more than 51% of the voting power continued to hold that voting power on the relevant date; on the uncontroverted facts, the disqualifying change in shareholding was absent and the Revenue's challenge failed. An appellate authority could also entertain a lawful additional depreciation claim raised through a revised computation, because the restriction in Goetze (India) Ltd. applies only to the Assessing Officer and does not limit appellate powers. The Tribunal upheld allowance of both claims and dismissed the Revenue's appeal.
Section 79 did not bar the set off of brought forward business losses where the persons beneficially holding more than 51% of the voting power continued to hold that voting power on the relevant date; on the uncontroverted facts, the disqualifying change in shareholding was absent and the Revenue's challenge failed. An appellate authority could also entertain a lawful additional depreciation claim raised through a revised computation, because the restriction in Goetze (India) Ltd. applies only to the Assessing Officer and does not limit appellate powers. The Tribunal upheld allowance of both claims and dismissed the Revenue's appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
