Transfer-pricing aggregation of distinct support-service and subcontract transactions was rejected, while debt-free receivables attracted no notional ...
Customs exemptions cover photovoltaic assembly machinery and PVF backsheets, while fully declared cleared imports may avoid confiscation and penalties...
Specific tariff classification for LCD devices overrides treatment as electricity-meter parts, defeating differential duty, extended limitation, and p...
Stayed disciplinary punishment does not establish unfitness for insolvency professional registration; reconsideration must disregard mere pendency of ...
Indirect corporate control can create related-party status, excluding financial creditors from Committee of Creditors representation, participation an...
Scientific research association approval requires continuing SIRO status, annual donation reporting, and donor certificates for the approved foundatio...
Page of 4888
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
241 to 260 of 97755 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 condoned a delay of 2066 days in filing the appeal, attributing the delay to the assessee's CA's inaction and ongoing FIRs causing a deadlock. The tribunal held that the impugned order was not decided on merits. Consequently, the delay before the CIT(A) was condoned on sufficient cause grounds, but a cost of Rs. 2,500 was imposed on the assessee for lack of vigilance. The impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remanded to the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication. The CIT(A) was directed to provide the assessee a full opportunity of hearing and to pass a reasoned, speaking order after the payment of the imposed cost to the Prime Minister's Relief Fund, with proof of payment to be submitted.
The ITAT condoned a delay of 2066 days in filing the appeal, attributing the delay to the assessee's CA's inaction and ongoing FIRs causing a deadlock. The tribunal held that the impugned order was not decided on merits. Consequently, the delay before the CIT(A) was condoned on sufficient cause grounds, but a cost of Rs. 2,500 was imposed on the assessee for lack of vigilance. The impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remanded to the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication. The CIT(A) was directed to provide the assessee a full opportunity of hearing and to pass a reasoned, speaking order after the payment of the imposed cost to the Prime Minister's Relief Fund, with proof of payment to be submitted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.