Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
- ⚖️ Instantly identify judgments decided in favour of the Assessee, Revenue, or Appellant
- 🔍 Narrow down results with higher precision
Try it now in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New Feature Launched ✕
Just a moment...
Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
Try it now in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Highlights
of of All Highlights
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of The ITAT set aside the order passed by the CIT/NFAC under section 250 in proceedings initiated under sections 147 read with 144 and 144B, concerning unexplained cash deposits during the demonetization period. The assessee failed to appear or submit written arguments before the CIT(A), who also did not issue a speaking order as required by section 250(6). Citing precedent, the ITAT held that the CIT(A) must dispose of the appeal on merits, even if ex parte. Consequently, the ITAT restored the matter to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits and directed issuance of a speaking order in compliance with statutory requirements. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
