Section 12 of Income Tax Act, 1961
Income Tax : The Income Tax Department has issued detailed FAQs explaining registration, audit, return filing, investment norms, and tax exempt...
Income Tax : This analysis explains how Parliament designed Sections 11 to 13 to ensure that tax-free income is ultimately used for charitable ...
Income Tax : This analysis explains how charitable and religious trusts qualify for exemption under Sections 11 to 13 of the Income-tax Act. It...
Income Tax : The document highlights situations where exemptions under Sections 11 and 12 can be withdrawn, including benefits provided to inte...
Income Tax : Courts held that prior exemption claims under Sections 11 and 12 cannot justify denial of 80G approval. The key takeaway is that b...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai quashed reassessment after finding no Section 143(2) notice and that the AO issued a final order disguised as a draft ...
Income Tax : ITAT Surat held that delayed filing of Form 10B is a procedural lapse and remanded the matter after directing the AO to consider t...
Corporate Law : The Supreme Court held that a writ petition filed decades after the finalisation of the record of rights was barred by delay and l...
Income Tax : The Court held that Section 263 could not be invoked where the AO had raised queries, examined replies and completed the assessmen...
Income Tax : ITAT held that remuneration to trustees must be examined for reasonableness and cannot be disallowed merely because it was paid to...
ITAT Ahmedabad held that matter regarding rejection of registration under section 12A of the Income Tax Act remitted back to file of CIT(E) with direction to explain the fulfillment of conditions as stipulated u/s.12A(1)(ac)(vi)-Item B of the Act.
ITAT Mumbai held that income from pharmacy and chemist division cannot be treated as business income from separate and independent activity. Thus, since pharmacy is an integral part of dominant purpose of hospital benefit u/s. 11(1) duly admissible.
ITAT Pune upholds exemption under Sections 11 and 12, ruling that technical errors in form submission don’t justify denial for registered charitable trusts.
Crimp pumps imported were classifiable under positive displacement pumps (CTI 8413 5010 / 8413 5090) and not as mounts and heads for toilet sprays under CTI 9616 1020 as claimed by the Customs authorities.
Bombay High Court held that mere delay in filing application for recall or review, not involving latches, acquiescence or estoppel, would not prevent this Court from exercising inherent power of recalling its order.
Gospel India Ministries Gutkula Vs CIT (ITAT Nagpur) ITAT Nagpur held that rejection of application in Form 10AB for grant of registration u/s. 12AB of the Income Tax Act on the ground of quoting of wrong provision not justifiable since quoting wrong provision cannot be held to be fatal to militate against well-deserved beneficial provision. […]
Delhi High Court held that reasonable payment for services rendered to persons specified u/s. 13(3) of the Income Tax Act by the trust is justifiable and such payment wouldn’t fall within the exception of section 13(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act.
Supreme Court held that that the preliminary inquiry is not mandatory under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 when the secret information itself discloses the commission of offences. Accordingly, appeal is allowed.
CESTAT Delhi held that no stranger to the contract of sale including the Customs officer has any right to re-determine the FOB value. The Customs Act and Rules cannot be applied to re-determine the FOB value. Accordingly, appeal allowed and order set aside.
CESTAT Delhi held that interest as per section 50 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [CGST Act] is applicable on delayed payment of IGST in the course of imports. Accordingly, interest confirmed u/s. 28AB of Customs Act not justified.
