All appeals dismissed; finding of anti-competitive bid-rigging upheld under Sections 3(3)(c), 3(3)(d) read with 3(1); cease-and-desist and total-turno...
Central Government notifies 11.541-hectare Special Economic Zone for semiconductor manufacturing; Approval Committee constituted, ICD status effective...
Government appoints National Customs Targeting Centre-Passenger director as customs officer with powers under PNR Regulations, 2022 and Sections 30A, ...
HC dismissed the challenge to the ITAT's refusal to admit belated affidavits under Rule 29 of the ITAT Rules, 1963, holding that admission of additional evidence is permissible only where the assessee was prevented by the assessing authority from adducing it earlier. The court found the affidavits to be afterthoughts explaining unexplained income under s.69A and noted prior returns declared the amounts as income; one appellant had been set ex parte and an alleged third-party claim was never advanced at earlier stages. Rejection of the belated evidence was held justified and the ITAT's fact-based orders affirmed.
HC dismissed the challenge to the ITAT's refusal to admit belated affidavits under Rule 29 of the ITAT Rules, 1963, holding that admission of additional evidence is permissible only where the assessee was prevented by the assessing authority from adducing it earlier. The court found the affidavits to be afterthoughts explaining unexplained income under s.69A and noted prior returns declared the amounts as income; one appellant had been set ex parte and an alleged third-party claim was never advanced at earlier stages. Rejection of the belated evidence was held justified and the ITAT's fact-based orders affirmed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.