The ITAT Amritsar remanded the 12A registration application after the CIT(E) ignored documentary proof of charitable activities. The trust must now be reconsidered with full verification of invoices, bank statements, and photographs.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that donations linked to milk supply were compulsory and cannot be treated as corpus contributions under Section 11(1)(d). The trust’s claim for exemption was denied, though a statutory deduction of 15% on revenue was allowed.
The court held that undisclosed investments in school property could be assessed against the wife due to her familial control over the educational society. Seized documents from the husband’s premises were relevant and sufficient evidence.
The tribunal ruled that funds donated to certain political parties were routed back to the donor, lacking genuineness. Deductions under Section 80GGC were disallowed as a result.
The Tribunal noted that amendments introduced by the Finance Act 2024 permit fresh filings after commencement of activities. The delayed application was remanded to the CIT(E) for consideration under the revised provision.
The Court held that a Section 148 notice issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer instead of the Faceless Assessing Officer was invalid, resulting in the reassessment order being set aside.
CESTAT Mumbai rules that sales tax discharged at net present value under a state incentive scheme cannot be included in transaction value for central excise duty.
The court ruled that a minor error in the PIN code of a consignee does not justify seizure under Section 129 of the CGST Act. The High Court emphasized that CBIC circulars are binding and no tax evasion can be presumed from such technical mistakes.
CESTAT ruled that absolute confiscation of prohibited goods is not valid if the goods have been re-exported before the appeal. The judgment reinforces the principle that confiscation requires the goods to be physically available.
The Court allowed the petitioner to file an appeal within four weeks and directed the Appellate Authority to decide on substantive grounds. This establishes that procedural delays should not bar appeals against registration cancellations.
