Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Nature-dependent electricity contracts receive new Ind AS accounting, hedge designation, transition and financial-statement disclosure requirements fr...
Alternative GST remedy permitted protective writ intervention for ex parte adjudication, preserving independent appellate review of input tax credit d...
Assessment against deceased sole proprietor requires proceedings against the legal representative, rendering prior assessment and appellate orders inv...
Page of 4814
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
421 to 440 of 96262 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
A statutory maritime board was held to fall within charitable purpose as an institution advancing general public utility, because its port dues, vessel-related charges, cargo and land charges, and other user fees arose from statutory port development, regulation and allied functions under governmental control. Surplus, reserves, or private participation through concessions did not by themselves establish commercial activity, so exemption under sections 11 and 12 remained available. An impermissible investment under section 11(5) read with section 13(1)(d) was held to affect only the income relatable to the offending investment, not the entire exemption. Addition of tax deducted at source as separate income was deleted. Depreciation under section 11(6) required asset-wise factual verification where double deduction was not shown.
A statutory maritime board was held to fall within charitable purpose as an institution advancing general public utility, because its port dues, vessel-related charges, cargo and land charges, and other user fees arose from statutory port development, regulation and allied functions under governmental control. Surplus, reserves, or private participation through concessions did not by themselves establish commercial activity, so exemption under sections 11 and 12 remained available. An impermissible investment under section 11(5) read with section 13(1)(d) was held to affect only the income relatable to the offending investment, not the entire exemption. Addition of tax deducted at source as separate income was deleted. Depreciation under section 11(6) required asset-wise factual verification where double deduction was not shown.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.