Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
Insolvency professional agency governance rules amended to add nominee directors, tighten independent director eligibility, and regulate managing dire...
CESTAT allowed the appeal by remand, setting aside the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and condoning a 36-day delay. The Tribunal held the limitation for filing an appeal under s.128 must be computed from communication of a speaking order by the Assessing Officer, not merely from the date of provisional assessment of the bill of entry. As the Appellant had requested a speaking order and received no response, the appeal was within time. The matter is remitted to the Commissioner (Appeals) to pass a decision conforming to s.128A(4), and to make further enquiries, if necessary under s.128A(3), and dispose of the appeal within four months.
CESTAT allowed the appeal by remand, setting aside the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and condoning a 36-day delay. The Tribunal held the limitation for filing an appeal under s.128 must be computed from communication of a speaking order by the Assessing Officer, not merely from the date of provisional assessment of the bill of entry. As the Appellant had requested a speaking order and received no response, the appeal was within time. The matter is remitted to the Commissioner (Appeals) to pass a decision conforming to s.128A(4), and to make further enquiries, if necessary under s.128A(3), and dispose of the appeal within four months.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.