Refund claim dismissed as time-barred under s.142(5); non-obstante clause read restrictively, merits not decided, self-assessment payments not mere de...
Page of 4819
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
9201 to 9220 of 96365 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
CESTAT dismissed the second rectification application as not maintainable and sustained the revenue's objection. The Tribunal held that where a rectification petition filed by one party has been considered and decided by the Tribunal under s.254(2) of the Income Tax Act, a subsequent rectification by either party on the same issue (here, eligibility for SSI threshold exemption) cannot be entertained; a second rectification is permissible only in respect of matters not earlier adjudicated in any rectification application by either party. Consequently, the second rectification was rejected and the application was dismissed.
CESTAT dismissed the second rectification application as not maintainable and sustained the revenue's objection. The Tribunal held that where a rectification petition filed by one party has been considered and decided by the Tribunal under s.254(2) of the Income Tax Act, a subsequent rectification by either party on the same issue (here, eligibility for SSI threshold exemption) cannot be entertained; a second rectification is permissible only in respect of matters not earlier adjudicated in any rectification application by either party. Consequently, the second rectification was rejected and the application was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
