The issue involved cash deposits during demonetization treated as unexplained credit. The Tribunal held that when deposits are backed by recorded sales and identifiable debtors, Section 68 cannot be invoked.
The issue involved addition under Section 69A for demonetization cash deposits. The Tribunal held that once sale consideration was accepted as source, the addition could not be sustained.
The Court addressed whether cancellation for non-filing of returns can be reversed after compliance. It held that authorities may restore registration if returns are filed and dues cleared as per Rule 22(4).
Even where premium limits are exceeded, death benefits continue to be fully exempt. This ensures protection for beneficiaries. The takeaway is that exemption rules differ for survival and death benefits.
The provisions mandate taxation of VDA transfers at a flat 30% rate without allowing deductions except cost of acquisition. The key takeaway is that strict computation rules limit tax benefits and increase effective tax liability.
The issue concerns taxation of income from online games. The law mandates a flat 30% tax regardless of skill or chance. The key takeaway is uniform taxation across all gaming activities.
Companies must maintain distinct books and furnish audit reports for the tonnage business. Non-compliance invalidates the scheme for the year. The takeaway is strict adherence to record-keeping rules.
The framework clarifies that exemption is contingent upon strict compliance with approval, filing, and income application rules. It holds that violations such as improper use of funds or failure to meet conditions can lead to denial of exemption and taxation.
Political parties must maintain detailed records of donors for large contributions. Lack of proper documentation can lead to denial of exemption. The key takeaway is enhanced accountability in political funding.
The issue relates to consequences of delayed return filing. Benefits such as deductions and loss carry forward are denied if returns are not filed on time. The ruling highlights strict adherence to due dates.
