Search and seizure: abatement of earlier search bars use of prior seized material in later search-based assessments; relief limited to new documents f...
Admission of additional evidence under remand rules must await a meaningful remand report; failure to do so breaches natural justice and mandates rema...
Export Obligation Discharge Certificates for EPCG compliance cannot be questioned by Customs unless DGFT adjudicates and cancels them, so demands quas...
Page of 4811
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
6561 to 6580 of 96208 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Condonation of delay was refused where the appellant failed to...
Condonation of Delay denied: communication lapses and corporate restructuring found insufficient; prolonged inaction and lack of bona fides led to refusal.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
Condonation of delay was refused where the appellant failed to establish sufficient cause for an unexplained 802 day delay. The tribunal found the asserted non intimation contradicted contemporaneous affidavits confirming receipt of orders and therefore was not a valid ground. The claimed corporate restructuring was held vague, factually belied by completion before the impugned orders and inadequate given the appellant's institutional capacity and awareness of the time value of money. The appellant's prolonged inaction and lack of vigilance, together with absence of bona fide supporting material, resulted in denial of condonation under limitation principles by the ITAT.
Condonation of delay was refused where the appellant failed to establish sufficient cause for an unexplained 802 day delay. The tribunal found the asserted non intimation contradicted contemporaneous affidavits confirming receipt of orders and therefore was not a valid ground. The claimed corporate restructuring was held vague, factually belied by completion before the impugned orders and inadequate given the appellant's institutional capacity and awareness of the time value of money. The appellant's prolonged inaction and lack of vigilance, together with absence of bona fide supporting material, resulted in denial of condonation under limitation principles by the ITAT.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.