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...
The High Court held that the authority wrongly treated the filing date of Form No. 10-IC as distinct from the date of the condonation request, despite the assessee having filed the return on time, clearly opted for section 115BAA in ITR-6, and filed Form No. 10-IC within three years from the end of the assessment year. The omission to attach the form with the return was a procedural lapse, not a ground to deny the concessional regime where the intention to opt was unambiguous and the form was filed during proceedings. The Court also found that bona fides and genuine hardship had to be examined, and the matter was remanded for fresh decision on merits without reopening delay or limitation.
The High Court held that the authority wrongly treated the filing date of Form No. 10-IC as distinct from the date of the condonation request, despite the assessee having filed the return on time, clearly opted for section 115BAA in ITR-6, and filed Form No. 10-IC within three years from the end of the assessment year. The omission to attach the form with the return was a procedural lapse, not a ground to deny the concessional regime where the intention to opt was unambiguous and the form was filed during proceedings. The Court also found that bona fides and genuine hardship had to be examined, and the matter was remanded for fresh decision on merits without reopening delay or limitation.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
