Customs valuation must use comparable contemporary imports, while confiscation fines and penalties require proportionate recalculation on reassessed v...
Depositor-protection proceedings prevail over corporate insolvency, while liquidators may recover chit receivables using copies of seized company reco...
Intermediary service classification fails where overseas admission facilitation is supplied independently, preserving export treatment and small-provi...
Satellite transponder bandwidth is telecommunication, not Business Support Service; foreign non-telegraph providers triggered no service tax liability...
Commitment proceedings gain extended timelines, structured defect refiling, and automatic resumption of inquiry after the adjusted completion period e...
Centralised assessment transfer becomes unwarranted once the searched person's assessment is complete, requiring restoration to the appropriate charge...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
321 to 340 of 96333 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The Tribunal held that the assessee's objects fell within protection of environment under section 2(15), not the residuary head of advancement of any other object of general public utility. Accordingly, the proviso to section 2(15) and the 20% commercial-receipt threshold were inapplicable, making denial of registration on that basis legally unsustainable. It further held that deduction of tax at source on receipts did not, by itself, defeat the exemption claim, that filing return in ITR-6 was explainable because the assessee was not registered at that time, and that filing under a wrong limb was only a bona fide technical error requiring verification. Registration under section 12A was accepted subject to verification of the technical objection.
The Tribunal held that the assessee's objects fell within protection of environment under section 2(15), not the residuary head of advancement of any other object of general public utility. Accordingly, the proviso to section 2(15) and the 20% commercial-receipt threshold were inapplicable, making denial of registration on that basis legally unsustainable. It further held that deduction of tax at source on receipts did not, by itself, defeat the exemption claim, that filing return in ITR-6 was explainable because the assessee was not registered at that time, and that filing under a wrong limb was only a bona fide technical error requiring verification. Registration under section 12A was accepted subject to verification of the technical objection.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.