Assessment time-barred u/s 153 due to missing competent-authority reference for Singapore exchange of information; assessment disallowed as barred by ...
Imported menthol-scented sweet supari classification dispute: seizure quashed, release for home consumption subject to duty bond; bank guarantee refus...
CKD/SKD air-conditioner components classifiable with finished units by essential character; prior advance ruling extended three years, FTA benefits po...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
7221 to 7240 of 96333 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.