Condonation of refiling delay refused where repeated defects, lack of diligence and vague explanations defeated the appeal against resolution plan app...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
4401 to 4420 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" ?
ITAT condoned a 267-day delay, admitted the appeal and allowed the assessee's challenge to a revision order under s.263. Holding that the PCIT acted without independent application of mind, failed to appreciate the distinction between substantive and protective assessments and overlooked pending appellate proceedings, the Tribunal quashed the impugned s.263 order and restored the assessment framed by the AO under s.147/ s.143(3). The Tribunal found the addition under s.68 in the related entity's substantive assessment preclusive of revising the assessee's protective assessment, concluded no mala fide conduct or investigation failure, and remitted no further relief; the assessee's appeal accordingly succeeds.
ITAT condoned a 267-day delay, admitted the appeal and allowed the assessee's challenge to a revision order under s.263. Holding that the PCIT acted without independent application of mind, failed to appreciate the distinction between substantive and protective assessments and overlooked pending appellate proceedings, the Tribunal quashed the impugned s.263 order and restored the assessment framed by the AO under s.147/ s.143(3). The Tribunal found the addition under s.68 in the related entity's substantive assessment preclusive of revising the assessee's protective assessment, concluded no mala fide conduct or investigation failure, and remitted no further relief; the assessee's appeal accordingly succeeds.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
