Condonation of Delay: directoral disputes and pending company proceedings can constitute reasonable cause, allowing a belated return to be treated as ...
Revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 upheld; faceless assessments subject to revision when AO fails requisite enquiries, remitted for fresh asse...
Limited scope of processing under section 143(1): enhancement without show cause is unsustainable; remand for residency, taxation and TDS verification...
Appellate authority lacked power to condone delay beyond the statutory 90-day limitation, so its dismissal on an 88-day delay was technically proper. The High Court, exercising writ jurisdiction under Article 226, may condone delay if reasons are stated in the memo of appeal; on the facts hospitalisation of the appellant's mother for cancer and a bona fide deposit (7.5%) towards filing the High Court exercised that power and set aside the impugned order, with stay operating in favour of the appellant since 06.02.2017.
Appellate authority lacked power to condone delay beyond the statutory 90-day limitation, so its dismissal on an 88-day delay was technically proper. The High Court, exercising writ jurisdiction under Article 226, may condone delay if reasons are stated in the memo of appeal; on the facts hospitalisation of the appellant's mother for cancer and a bona fide deposit (7.5%) towards filing the High Court exercised that power and set aside the impugned order, with stay operating in favour of the appellant since 06.02.2017.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.