Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Preliminary-expense amortisation and MAT exempt-income adjustments prevailed, while trademark costs and managerial remuneration require fresh verifica...
Export valuation requires contemporaneous evidence; unrelated invoices cannot prove overvaluation, and dual penalties on firm and partner are impermis...
Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Nature-dependent electricity contracts receive new Ind AS accounting, hedge designation, transition and financial-statement disclosure requirements fr...
Section 128 of the Customs Act permits an appeal within 60 days of communication of the order, with only a further 30 days available for condonation by the appellate authority; beyond that outer limit, the authority lacks jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. The High Court upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) and Tribunal in refusing to admit appeals filed after the statutory period. It further held that this limitation does not create an absolute bar to constitutional relief under Article 226. As the delay showed no deliberate inaction or lack of bona fides and the merits had never been examined, the Court condoned the delay subject to costs, set aside the appellate orders, and directed restoration of the appeal for fresh decision on merits.
Section 128 of the Customs Act permits an appeal within 60 days of communication of the order, with only a further 30 days available for condonation by the appellate authority; beyond that outer limit, the authority lacks jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. The High Court upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) and Tribunal in refusing to admit appeals filed after the statutory period. It further held that this limitation does not create an absolute bar to constitutional relief under Article 226. As the delay showed no deliberate inaction or lack of bona fides and the merits had never been examined, the Court condoned the delay subject to costs, set aside the appellate orders, and directed restoration of the appeal for fresh decision on merits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4826 
Join Channel 
