Functional comparability governs selection of support-service and IT-enabled service comparables, with verification required for unresolved data and m...
Bank account freezing requires statutory authority; anti-money-laundering compliance and KYC monitoring do not permit unilateral indefinite restrictio...
The HC set aside the CBDT's order refusing condonation of a 3 years, 10 months and 23 days delay in filing a revised return by the Petitioner-Trust, holding that the delay arose from a bona fide belief that a second rectification application remained pending. Applying a justice-oriented approach to exercise under s.119(2)(b) of the IT Act rather than a pedantic one, the court found the delay was not deliberate, negligent or tainted by mala fides and that refusal to condone would cause grave hardship to the Petitioner. Consequently, the HC directed that the 4th Respondent ought to have condoned the delay and the impugned refusal is set aside.
The HC set aside the CBDT's order refusing condonation of a 3 years, 10 months and 23 days delay in filing a revised return by the Petitioner-Trust, holding that the delay arose from a bona fide belief that a second rectification application remained pending. Applying a justice-oriented approach to exercise under s.119(2)(b) of the IT Act rather than a pedantic one, the court found the delay was not deliberate, negligent or tainted by mala fides and that refusal to condone would cause grave hardship to the Petitioner. Consequently, the HC directed that the 4th Respondent ought to have condoned the delay and the impugned refusal is set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.