Tax appeal allowed: AO exceeded s.144C DRP mandate by introducing new findings and recharacterising non-resident receipts as permanent establishment i...
Anonymized petitioner gets partial relief: bank guarantee quashed, PVC-coated fabric released under reduced conditions while valuation proceedings con...
The AT dismissed the application for condonation of delay of 512 days and refused to condone the delayed filing of the appeal. The Tribunal found dispositive evidence-an acknowledgment letter from the HUF's Karta confirming receipt of the SCN on 9.12.2021 and seeking time to reply-matching the address in the appeal and SCN, and the subsequent recovery notice sent to the same address, which established actual notice of proceedings. The appellant's plea of non-receipt was held factually incorrect; accordingly the AT found no merit in excusing the delay and rejected the prayer for condonation, leaving the substantive challenge to the SEBI (PFUTP) allegations unadmitted for adjudication.
The AT dismissed the application for condonation of delay of 512 days and refused to condone the delayed filing of the appeal. The Tribunal found dispositive evidence-an acknowledgment letter from the HUF's Karta confirming receipt of the SCN on 9.12.2021 and seeking time to reply-matching the address in the appeal and SCN, and the subsequent recovery notice sent to the same address, which established actual notice of proceedings. The appellant's plea of non-receipt was held factually incorrect; accordingly the AT found no merit in excusing the delay and rejected the prayer for condonation, leaving the substantive challenge to the SEBI (PFUTP) allegations unadmitted for adjudication.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4821 
Join Channel 
