Food supplement classification requires common parlance and authoritative tests, preventing treatment as proprietary Ayurvedic medicines without suppo...
Specified regulatory authority income receives conditional tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income character, and return f...
Tax exemption for regulatory authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-filing...
Input tax credit conditions remain constitutionally valid, with eligible recipient claims considered under GST circulars and retrospective filing dead...
Bogus donation receipts justified commission income assessment and defeated political-party tax exemption for inaccurate accounts and reporting failur...
Page of 4811
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
901 to 920 of 96208 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Cash recovered from the appellant's possession was held to be tangible movable property and capable of constituting benami property under the PBPT Act, which covers movable as well as immovable assets. The Tribunal rejected the argument that a benami transaction requires three parties, holding that a benamidar and beneficial owner alone are sufficient under the statutory scheme. It further found that Section 2(9)(D) applied because the persons allegedly providing the cash were not traceable and the source of consideration remained unexplained. The appellant's willingness to offer the amount to tax did not bar PBPT proceedings, as the Act operates independently of the Income-tax Act. The provisional attachment was upheld and the appeal dismissed.
Cash recovered from the appellant's possession was held to be tangible movable property and capable of constituting benami property under the PBPT Act, which covers movable as well as immovable assets. The Tribunal rejected the argument that a benami transaction requires three parties, holding that a benamidar and beneficial owner alone are sufficient under the statutory scheme. It further found that Section 2(9)(D) applied because the persons allegedly providing the cash were not traceable and the source of consideration remained unexplained. The appellant's willingness to offer the amount to tax did not bar PBPT proceedings, as the Act operates independently of the Income-tax Act. The provisional attachment was upheld and the appeal dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4811 
Join Channel 
