Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
The High Court accepted the petitioner's contention that they were prevented from filing an appeal within the stipulated time due to the delay in communicating the impugned order. Despite the provision stating that the limitation period commences from the date of passing the order, the court held that since there is a provision for filing an appeal, it necessarily implies that the factual aspects shall be examined by the Appellate Authority. Consequently, the petition was disposed of, allowing the petitioner to file an appeal against the impugned order within the prescribed time limit from the date of receiving the order's communication.
The High Court accepted the petitioner's contention that they were prevented from filing an appeal within the stipulated time due to the delay in communicating the impugned order. Despite the provision stating that the limitation period commences from the date of passing the order, the court held that since there is a provision for filing an appeal, it necessarily implies that the factual aspects shall be examined by the Appellate Authority. Consequently, the petition was disposed of, allowing the petitioner to file an appeal against the impugned order within the prescribed time limit from the date of receiving the order's communication.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
