Educational approval requires mandatory State registration, but incidental surplus and trustee-owned land do not prove private benefit or profit motiv...
Judicial review of settlement orders cannot reopen settled customs notices, while statutory interest remains subject to verification and quantificatio...
Customs Broker licence lending for consideration justified revocation where exporter authorisation and client verification obligations were also breac...
Fraudulent import documents suspend limitation protection, while redemption of confiscated goods requires duty and interest despite bona fide purchase...
ODR arbitration participation remains mandatory after failed conciliation, while jurisdictional and maintainability objections stay available before t...
Transparency in technical bid evaluation requires disclosed standards and recorded reasons; opaque scoring invalidated tender awards and required fres...
Automated export obligation extensions remove separate regional applications after committee approval for Advance Authorisation and EPCG authorisation...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
441 to 460 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
A High Court held that a beneficial CBDT circular issued under section 119(2)(b) for condonation of delay in filing prescribed forms must be applied to genuine and bona fide cases, even where the assessment year is not expressly named. The court found that the relevant circular was the one dated 18.11.2024, which addressed condonation of delay, and that omission of AY 2023-24 was not decisive because the circular was meant to remedy genuine hardship. Rejecting a narrow year-specific reading as anomalous and unjust, the court set aside the refusal order and remitted the matter for fresh consideration in accordance with law.
A High Court held that a beneficial CBDT circular issued under section 119(2)(b) for condonation of delay in filing prescribed forms must be applied to genuine and bona fide cases, even where the assessment year is not expressly named. The court found that the relevant circular was the one dated 18.11.2024, which addressed condonation of delay, and that omission of AY 2023-24 was not decisive because the circular was meant to remedy genuine hardship. Rejecting a narrow year-specific reading as anomalous and unjust, the court set aside the refusal order and remitted the matter for fresh consideration in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
