It was ruled that denial of registration merely because activities are at an initial stage is unjustified. The takeaway is that limited funds and phased implementation do not negate charitable intent.
The dispute involved whether the Varanasi Bench could adjudicate an appeal arising from a Kolkata-based assessment. The Tribunal held that filing before an incorrect Bench is fatal and parties must approach the jurisdictional Tribunal.
It was ruled that refusal to condone delay, when justified, defeats substantive justice. The takeaway is that procedural delay should not block adjudication of intimation adjustments.
It was ruled that speculative losses from non-genuine share transactions cannot be adjusted against interest income. The decision reinforces strict application of sections 43(5) and 73 where delivery is doubtful.
Exemption was curtailed because the auditor reported application from past accumulations. The Tribunal ruled CPC acted correctly but allowed reassessment based on corrected Form 10BB.
The matter was sent back as the appellate authority did not examine the plea for allowance in the year of later TDS payment. The ruling stresses complete adjudication of all grounds raised.
Where compensation and interest are deposited under judicial custody due to a pending appeal, no real income accrues. The Tribunal ruled that taxing such MACT interest is impermissible until actual receipt.
It was held that transport charges cannot be disallowed when PAN-based TDS, ledger matching, and banking trails exist. The ruling confirms that non-response to notices alone is insufficient.
The reopening relied on a bank account number that did not match the account from which transactions were considered. The Tribunal restored the case for fresh adjudication, emphasizing that reassessment must be based on accurate bank details.
Firms facing advisories, misconduct findings, or debarment face point reductions or outright ineligibility. The policy reinforces regulatory compliance as a condition for empanelment.
