Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1481 to 1500 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" ?
The ITAT set aside ex parte appellate orders dismissing the assessee's appeals as time barred, holding that delay should not defeat consideration where the challenge goes to the jurisdiction to levy late fee under section 234E for the period before 1 June 2015. Following the Kerala High Court decision in Jiji Varghese, the Tribunal held that the first appellate authority ought to have condoned the delay and heard the appeals on merits. It did not decide the validity of the levy itself and remanded the matters for fresh adjudication after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of hearing.
The ITAT set aside ex parte appellate orders dismissing the assessee's appeals as time barred, holding that delay should not defeat consideration where the challenge goes to the jurisdiction to levy late fee under section 234E for the period before 1 June 2015. Following the Kerala High Court decision in Jiji Varghese, the Tribunal held that the first appellate authority ought to have condoned the delay and heard the appeals on merits. It did not decide the validity of the levy itself and remanded the matters for fresh adjudication after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of hearing.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.