Validity of faceless assessment procedure challenged for jurisdictional AO intervention mid-remand, resulting in quashing of assessment for procedural...
Inventory write-off and fraudulent/wrongful trading allegations in corporate insolvency led to director liability principles applied and appeal dismis...
Page of 4813
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
6741 to 6760 of 96257 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Section 107(4) of the Act allows the Appellate Authority to condone delay by permitting an appeal to be filed within an additional one month period if the appellant shows sufficient cause for missing the primary three or six month window; therefore a 15 day delay justified by non fanciful grounds cannot be defeated by a hyper technical threshold dismissal. The High Court found the respondents' insistence on an earlier cutoff date legally unsustainable, set aside the earlier order, condoned the delay, and remitted the matter to the appellate authority for adjudication on merits.
Section 107(4) of the Act allows the Appellate Authority to condone delay by permitting an appeal to be filed within an additional one month period if the appellant shows sufficient cause for missing the primary three or six month window; therefore a 15 day delay justified by non fanciful grounds cannot be defeated by a hyper technical threshold dismissal. The High Court found the respondents' insistence on an earlier cutoff date legally unsustainable, set aside the earlier order, condoned the delay, and remitted the matter to the appellate authority for adjudication on merits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.