Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Page of 4801
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
341 to 360 of 96001 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Levy of penalty u/s 234E - delay of 484 days in filling Form No. 26Q (TDS Return) - technical glitches on the part of the system - The ITAT allowed the appeals, focusing on the legal and technical nuances presented. The tribunal found that the appeals were filed within the extended limitation period provided by the Supreme Court due to the COVID-19 pandemic. It also highlighted that the technical issues faced by the assessee in filing TDS returns were not considered by the CIT(A), which led to an unjust imposition of late fees.
Levy of penalty u/s 234E - delay of 484 days in filling Form No. 26Q (TDS Return) - technical glitches on the part of the system - The ITAT allowed the appeals, focusing on the legal and technical nuances presented. The tribunal found that the appeals were filed within the extended limitation period provided by the Supreme Court due to the COVID-19 pandemic. It also highlighted that the technical issues faced by the assessee in filing TDS returns were not considered by the CIT(A), which led to an unjust imposition of late fees.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.