ESOP expenditure allowed as FMV difference; long-term capital gain issue sent back for collector rate determination; deferred income additions disallo...
Appeal allowed; impugned order quashed as regulator failed to prove nexus or manipulative scheme; sale genuine - s.12A(a)-(c), Regs 3(a)-(d),4(1),4(2)...
Appellant's ring-back tone service held OIDAR, taxable domestically for 01.07.2012-31.07.2016; liability confirmed, penalties vacated, remanded for re...
The ITAT dismissed the application for condonation of delay of 1,370 days, holding that the appellant failed to establish "sufficient cause" for the delay and did not demonstrate requisite due diligence in prosecuting the appeal. The Tribunal emphasized that the burden rests on the appellant to explain delay and that authorities are not obliged to investigate causes. Reliance on erroneous advice of a tax consultant, without contemporaneous steps or plausible justification, did not absolve the appellant-a private limited company-of statutory obligations; although no mala fides were found, the delay was substantial and unjustified, and the appeal was barred by lapse of time.
The ITAT dismissed the application for condonation of delay of 1,370 days, holding that the appellant failed to establish "sufficient cause" for the delay and did not demonstrate requisite due diligence in prosecuting the appeal. The Tribunal emphasized that the burden rests on the appellant to explain delay and that authorities are not obliged to investigate causes. Reliance on erroneous advice of a tax consultant, without contemporaneous steps or plausible justification, did not absolve the appellant-a private limited company-of statutory obligations; although no mala fides were found, the delay was substantial and unjustified, and the appeal was barred by lapse of time.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
