Section 80G(5)(iii) of the Income Tax Act

Expenditure incurred for commercial expediency, even without a direct or immediate benefit but indirectly facilitating business, is deductible as laid out wholly and exclusively for trade. The scope of reference jurisdiction under Section 66 is limited to questions of law, allowing challenges to Tribunal findings of fact only if they are perverse, unreasonable, or lack evidence.

Whether there was sufficient cause for delay in making applications for registration under section 12A and 80G is always a question of fact, and contumacious conduct by the assessee must be established for levying penalty under section 271C for non-deduction of TDS.

An intention to benefit a section of the public, as distinguished from a special individual, is sufficient for a trust to be considered for charitable registration and exemptions. This applies even if the beneficiaries belong to a specific caste, community, or professional group, allowing the trust to qualify as serving a general public utility under Section 2(15).

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal functions judicially and must decide all questions of fact and law before it. The Tribunal may act upon probabilities and use presumptions to bridge gaps in evidence, especially when conclusive proof is not available due to delays or the nature of transactions.

Registration of an institution under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act is sufficient proof that it was established for charitable purposes, and therefore, registration under Section 80G cannot be denied solely on the basis that the institution is not for charitable purposes.