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...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
The ITAT considered the condonation of delay in filing appeals before the CIT(A). The delay of 93 days was attributed to pursuing alternative remedies in the High Court. The ITAT held that the delay was reasonable and not willful, supported by legal precedent. The ITAT emphasized that the cause for delay is crucial, not just the duration. Citing a case where a 21-year delay was condoned, the ITAT found the 93-day delay acceptable. The delay was condoned u/s 253(5) of the Act. Regarding ex-parte assessment orders, the ITAT referred to a High Court decision criticizing the AO's failure to consider the assessee's submissions. The matter was remitted back to the AO for reconsideration, emphasizing adherence to principles of natural justice.
The ITAT considered the condonation of delay in filing appeals before the CIT(A). The delay of 93 days was attributed to pursuing alternative remedies in the High Court. The ITAT held that the delay was reasonable and not willful, supported by legal precedent. The ITAT emphasized that the cause for delay is crucial, not just the duration. Citing a case where a 21-year delay was condoned, the ITAT found the 93-day delay acceptable. The delay was condoned u/s 253(5) of the Act. Regarding ex-parte assessment orders, the ITAT referred to a High Court decision criticizing the AO's failure to consider the assessee's submissions. The matter was remitted back to the AO for reconsideration, emphasizing adherence to principles of natural justice.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.