Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
Merchant banker regulation consolidates registration, governance, capital, reporting, outsourcing and investor-protection requirements under an update...
Page of 4813
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
901 to 920 of 96257 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Quantification of weighted deduction under section 35(2AB) depended on the expenditure approved in Form 3CL, not on the assessee's basic eligibility for the deduction. The Tribunal held that Form 3CL had already been sent to the jurisdictional Assessing Officer and therefore could not be rejected as additional evidence in rectification proceedings. Reading Rule 6(7A) for the relevant assessment year, the Assessing Officer was required to take cognizance of the approved expenditure and recompute the deduction accordingly. The impugned order was set aside and the issue was restored for fresh quantification after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of hearing.
Quantification of weighted deduction under section 35(2AB) depended on the expenditure approved in Form 3CL, not on the assessee's basic eligibility for the deduction. The Tribunal held that Form 3CL had already been sent to the jurisdictional Assessing Officer and therefore could not be rejected as additional evidence in rectification proceedings. Reading Rule 6(7A) for the relevant assessment year, the Assessing Officer was required to take cognizance of the approved expenditure and recompute the deduction accordingly. The impugned order was set aside and the issue was restored for fresh quantification after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of hearing.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4813 
Join Channel 
