Depreciation and routine compliance expenses disallowance did not prove inaccurate particulars or misreporting; penalty sustained only on foreign trav...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3481 to 3500 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC held that the appeal had been rejected on limitation, though partial tax liability was admitted. Total tax demand was Rs. 9,99,558/-, of which the petitioner had accepted Rs. 3,65,918/- but deposited only Rs. 99,956/-. HC directed the petitioner to deposit the balance admitted tax of Rs. 2,65,962/- within 30 days, and additionally to deposit Rs. 1,58,410/-, being 25% of the disputed tax of Rs. 6,33,640/-, from the petitioner's Electronic Cash Register within the same period. On such compliance, the 1st respondent/Appellate Authority was mandated to entertain the appeal and decide it on merits, without rejecting it on the ground of limitation. The petition was disposed of with these directions.
HC held that the appeal had been rejected on limitation, though partial tax liability was admitted. Total tax demand was Rs. 9,99,558/-, of which the petitioner had accepted Rs. 3,65,918/- but deposited only Rs. 99,956/-. HC directed the petitioner to deposit the balance admitted tax of Rs. 2,65,962/- within 30 days, and additionally to deposit Rs. 1,58,410/-, being 25% of the disputed tax of Rs. 6,33,640/-, from the petitioner's Electronic Cash Register within the same period. On such compliance, the 1st respondent/Appellate Authority was mandated to entertain the appeal and decide it on merits, without rejecting it on the ground of limitation. The petition was disposed of with these directions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
