Condonation of refiling delay refused where repeated defects, lack of diligence and vague explanations defeated the appeal against resolution plan app...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
4401 to 4420 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The ITAT Ahmedabad, in proceedings u/s 201(1) and 201(1A), found the assessee-in-default for non-deduction of TDS u/s 194IA on property purchases. The assessee failed to provide evidence to support eligibility for proviso to Section 201(1), leading to dismissal of appeal. Interest u/s 201(1A) upheld till payee's return filing. Penalty u/s 271(c) for non-deduction of TDS u/s 194-IA was deemed justified. The appeal was decided against the assessee.
The ITAT Ahmedabad, in proceedings u/s 201(1) and 201(1A), found the assessee-in-default for non-deduction of TDS u/s 194IA on property purchases. The assessee failed to provide evidence to support eligibility for proviso to Section 201(1), leading to dismissal of appeal. Interest u/s 201(1A) upheld till payee's return filing. Penalty u/s 271(c) for non-deduction of TDS u/s 194-IA was deemed justified. The appeal was decided against the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
