Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
Merchant banker regulation consolidates registration, governance, capital, reporting, outsourcing and investor-protection requirements under an update...
Page of 4798
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
601 to 620 of 95957 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.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
