Blocked input tax credit for resort construction remains unavailable; interest follows actual utilisation, while delayed payment attracts statutory pe...
Duplicate PAN allocation requires record verification and deactivation reasons before assessment-related transactions can be attributed to an assessee...
Faceless assessment safeguards require requested personal hearings and adequate final show-cause response time, failing which reassessment is required...
Embezzlement losses in charitable institutions remain allowable when misappropriation is established, irrecoverable, and not a specified-person benefi...
National long-distance undertaking status supports deduction where separately licensed infrastructure, resources, revenue, and expenditure establish c...
Page of 4888
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
141 to 160 of 97750 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Limitation for appeals under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code requires filing within 30 days of the impugned order. The appellate forum may condone delay only for a further period not exceeding 15 days on sufficient cause and has no jurisdiction to entertain an appeal beyond that maximum period. Availability of the order in the public domain on the date of pronouncement defeats a contrary assertion of delayed upload, while unsupported claims regarding delayed receipt of a certified copy do not establish sufficient cause. Knowledge of the order is not an independent basis for extending limitation under the insolvency regime. An appeal filed beyond the maximum condonable period against revival of the corporate insolvency resolution process is therefore not maintainable.
Limitation for appeals under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code requires filing within 30 days of the impugned order. The appellate forum may condone delay only for a further period not exceeding 15 days on sufficient cause and has no jurisdiction to entertain an appeal beyond that maximum period. Availability of the order in the public domain on the date of pronouncement defeats a contrary assertion of delayed upload, while unsupported claims regarding delayed receipt of a certified copy do not establish sufficient cause. Knowledge of the order is not an independent basis for extending limitation under the insolvency regime. An appeal filed beyond the maximum condonable period against revival of the corporate insolvency resolution process is therefore not maintainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4888 
