Bengaluru, Sep 7 (PTI) The Enforcement Directorate on Monday recorded the statement of former Karnataka minister and Congress leader B Nagendra in a money laundering investigation linked to the alleged misappropriation of Valmiki Corporation funds, officials said. The 54-year-old MLA's statement was recorded under the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) at the ED's office here, they said. The federal probe agency had earlier questioned Nagendra, a Congress MLA fro... ... ...

Lucknow, Sep 7 (PTI) The Allahabad High Court has sought responses from the Centre and the Uttar Pradesh government on a PIL challenging the Aadhaar-based online system for issuing learning and driving licences after it was alleged that a learning licence was issued in the name of a deceased person. A Lucknow bench of Justice Rajan Roy and Justice Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi passed the order on a PIL filed by Santosh Mishra, who challenged Rule 11 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989, and no... ... ...

Digital donation collection facilities for temples and religious establishments include kiosks, Bharat Bill Payment System payments and UPI QR-code payments. Donations may be credited directly to the relevant trust account, supported by transaction reconciliation and digital records to improve transparency and ease of transactions. Technology services also cover municipal dues payments and property-tax assessment, alongside banking support for defence-sector ecosystems, MSMEs, agriculture and priority-sector lending.

Foreign-exchange market conditions resulted in the rupee closing weaker against the US dollar after initial support from foreign currency deposit inflows. Rising crude oil prices and weakness in domestic equity markets weighed on sentiment and offset support from a softer dollar and foreign investor equity purchases. Future movement may remain influenced by foreign inflows, crude oil prices, domestic market conditions, geopolitical tensions and inflation data.

Challenge to surrogate advertising allegations concerns notices requiring brand ambassadors promoting Vimal Elaichi to prove that it differs from prohibited pan masala, halt promotions, and remove digital materials. The product promoter contests the notices because they were addressed only to the actors, it was not heard, and the regulator allegedly lacked jurisdiction to stop the advertisements. Territorial jurisdiction to entertain the challenge is also contested.

Section 80P(2)(d) allows a co-operative society to deduct interest or dividend income derived from investments with another co-operative society. Co-operative banks registered under applicable State co-operative societies law fall within the meaning of a co-operative society for this purpose. Consequently, interest earned by a co-operative housing society on deposits with such co-operative banks qualifies for deduction under Section 80P(2)(d).

Cash repayment of an earlier trade advance may not attract Section 269SS where it is genuinely a refund of an advance originally paid through banking channels, rather than acceptance of a loan or deposit. Cash receipts recorded as reductions in loans and advances required verification against the relevant ledger accounts and audited financial statements before penalty under Section 271D could be determined. The appellate order was set aside, and the matter was remitted for verification of the supporting records and fresh adjudication on merits.

TDS credit for instalment payments in real-estate transactions may be allowed where the related revenue was recognised under the percentage completion method and taxed in earlier assessment years. Non-inclusion of that income in the return for the year of deduction does not by itself preclude credit. Eligibility depends on verification that Form 26AS deductions correspond to turnover already offered to tax, through reconciliation of the TDS claim with prior-year revenue. Eligible credit should then be granted in accordance with law.

Own funds exceeding investments generating exempt income support the presumption that those investments were made from own funds, precluding interest disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D. Indirect-expenditure disallowance under Rule 8D also requires recorded satisfaction that the claim of no such expenditure is incorrect; absent that satisfaction, such disallowance is not sustainable. Contributions to an employees' welfare fund fall within the prohibition under Section 40A(9). Employees' contributions to PF and ESI are treated as disallowable in line with the binding principle in Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd.

Depreciation is allowable on moulds and tools where expenditure initially claimed as revenue is capitalised and no depreciation has previously been allowed on that cost. Interest-related disallowance against exempt income is unwarranted where own funds exceed the investments generating exempt income, as borrowed funds cannot be presumed to have financed those investments. Refundable distributor deposits do not reduce the actual cost of freezers for depreciation because they are neither reimbursements of the asset cost nor subsidies. Accordingly, depreciation applies to the capitalised moulds and tools and the full freezer cost, without an exempt-income interest disallowance.

Section 80P(2)(d) permits a co-operative society to deduct qualifying interest income received from another co-operative society. A co-operative society that does not hold a banking licence cannot be treated as a co-operative bank. Accordingly, interest earned by a co-operative society on deposits with co-operative banks qualifies for deduction under Section 80P(2)(d).

Fair market value of property as on 1 April 1981 for long-term capital gains computation requires reliable valuation evidence. An unsupported value adopted by the assessee cannot be accepted, while Sub-Registrar guidance value does not necessarily reflect fair market value. The Assessing Officer must refer the property to the Departmental Valuation Officer and determine the relevant fair market value on that basis.

Accommodation-entry income cannot be estimated at a uniform commission rate where beneficiary identities, underlying transactions and commission rates are not fully verified. Commission income may be estimated only for verifiably identified beneficiaries; credits lacking substantiated beneficiary details require examination as unexplained cash credits. Where the record does not establish the identified transactions, assessment of corresponding sums in beneficiaries' hands, or the applicable commission percentage, the addition requires fresh determination. The assessee must provide complete documentary evidence, following which the Assessing Officer must make a de novo assessment in accordance with law.

Interest paid by a co-operative bank to co-operative housing societies on time deposits is subject to tax deduction at source where it exceeds the prescribed threshold. The specific rules applicable to co-operative societies carrying on banking business prevail over the general member-interest exemption. The amendment effective from 1 June 2015 excludes co-operative banks from that exemption for time-deposit interest, operates prospectively, and applies to the relevant assessment year. Housing co-operative society recipients are not banking entities eligible for the exemption; accordingly, the bank must deduct tax on qualifying interest payments.

Accommodation-entry assessments distinguish between unidentified and identified beneficiaries: related bank credits are assessable as unexplained cash credits where beneficiaries are not disclosed, while commission-rate assessment applies where they are identified. The estimated commission-income additions therefore require fresh determination under that principle, as genuine trading and the claimed commission rate were unsupported. Share application money remains taxable as unexplained cash credit where confirmations do not establish subscribers' identity, financial capacity and transaction genuineness. Cash deposits remain undisclosed income where no documentary evidence establishes their source.

Revisional jurisdiction requires an assessment order to be both erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. Explanation 2 to section 263 applies where the Assessing Officer has failed to make necessary inquiry or verification. Where the assessment record shows a specific inquiry into a section 80G claim, supported by furnished particulars and documents, revision cannot rest on alleged lack of inquiry. Corporate social responsibility expenditure disallowed under section 37(1) may still raise a debatable issue regarding eligibility for section 80G deduction. An assessment adopting a plausible view on that issue is not erroneous, making revision under section 263 impermissible.

Tax deduction at source is not required on interest paid by a co-operative bank to a co-operative-society depositor, as the exemption for interest paid by one co-operative society to another continues to apply to co-operative banks in respect of time deposits. Consequently, the bank cannot be treated as an assessee in default for non-deduction on such interest. Late fee for delayed TDS statements depends on whether the relevant return was filed within the prescribed time; verification of timely filing is required, and the fee must be deleted if timely filing is established.

Revisionary jurisdiction requires an assessment order to be both erroneous and prejudicial to the Revenue. Where the taxpayer disclosed CSR payments and supporting donation particulars, acceptance of a deduction claim under section 80G may represent a considered and legally plausible view. A different view does not establish error when two reasonable views are possible, and inadequate inquiry differs from complete absence of inquiry. Disallowance of CSR expenditure as business expenditure under section 37(1) does not prevent a separate section 80G deduction if its conditions are met. The mandatory nature of CSR spending alone does not disqualify qualifying payments, leaving revision unavailable on these facts.

Reassessment notices concerning escaped income below the prescribed threshold cannot be issued after three years from the end of the relevant assessment year. A notice issued beyond that limitation is time-barred and void, rendering the consequential reassessment legally unsustainable. A pure legal challenge to such a notice may be admitted as an additional ground where it goes to the root of the assessment and requires no further evidence or factual verification.

Mandatory approval from the competent authority under Section 151 is required for a reassessment notice issued under Section 148 after three years from the end of the relevant assessment year. Approval contrary to that requirement renders the notice invalid. The jurisdictional objection, involving a pure legal question requiring no further evidence, was admitted at the threshold. Invalidity of the Section 148 notice resulted in quashing of the reopening proceedings and the reassessment order founded on it.