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...
Recall of ex parte orders requires a showing of sufficient cause for non-appearance, whereas review is confined to an error apparent on the face of the record. The Tribunal found no sufficient cause where repeated opportunities had been granted, including a final opportunity after the applicant was already proceeded ex parte, yet the applicant remained absent. Illness and death in one partner's family and lapse of previous counsel were held insufficient, especially when other partners of the firm also gave no explanation. The request to place additional material on record, including a later Supreme Court decision, was not considered because recall itself failed. The recall applications were dismissed.
Recall of ex parte orders requires a showing of sufficient cause for non-appearance, whereas review is confined to an error apparent on the face of the record. The Tribunal found no sufficient cause where repeated opportunities had been granted, including a final opportunity after the applicant was already proceeded ex parte, yet the applicant remained absent. Illness and death in one partner's family and lapse of previous counsel were held insufficient, especially when other partners of the firm also gave no explanation. The request to place additional material on record, including a later Supreme Court decision, was not considered because recall itself failed. The recall applications were dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
