Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 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 dismissed the appeal due to an unjustified delay of 819 days in filing, finding no sufficient cause to condone the delay. Although the delay arose from incorrect advice by the assessee's CA, the Tribunal emphasized the assessee's duty to be vigilant regarding statutory obligations. The assessee's negligence and failure to actively pursue the appeal process, including inconsistent claims and dilatory conduct, undermined the justification for delay. The Tribunal rejected reliance solely on sympathy or counsel's fault, noting absence of bona fide efforts to comply timely. Consequently, the delay was held inordinate and inexcusable, warranting dismissal of the appeal on procedural grounds.
The ITAT dismissed the appeal due to an unjustified delay of 819 days in filing, finding no sufficient cause to condone the delay. Although the delay arose from incorrect advice by the assessee's CA, the Tribunal emphasized the assessee's duty to be vigilant regarding statutory obligations. The assessee's negligence and failure to actively pursue the appeal process, including inconsistent claims and dilatory conduct, undermined the justification for delay. The Tribunal rejected reliance solely on sympathy or counsel's fault, noting absence of bona fide efforts to comply timely. Consequently, the delay was held inordinate and inexcusable, warranting dismissal of the appeal on procedural grounds.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.