Stamp valuation increases after registration-fee payment led to deletion of property-purchase addition within tolerance and without valuation referral...
Capital Asset Conversion Requires Proven Business Stock Treatment; Paper Consideration in Spousal Flat Transfers Does Not Create Taxable Business Inco...
Human-probability test defeats political donation deduction where banking records mask accommodation-entry fund layering and evidence shows non-genuin...
Commercial property status protects capital-gains exemption when residential-house ownership limits are tested, while agricultural-land character gove...
Section 112(3) confines the prescribed limitation period to filing an appeal before the Tribunal and does not impose a separate six-month deadline on the Commissioner to review the first appellate order. A departmental appeal filed within the applicable extended filing period therefore remains maintainable even where the Commissioner's review occurred after six months. The maintainability objection was rejected, and the appeal was admitted for adjudication on merits.
Section 112(3) confines the prescribed limitation period to filing an appeal before the Tribunal and does not impose a separate six-month deadline on the Commissioner to review the first appellate order. A departmental appeal filed within the applicable extended filing period therefore remains maintainable even where the Commissioner's review occurred after six months. The maintainability objection was rejected, and the appeal was admitted for adjudication on merits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.