Religious purpose exclusion versus charitable purpose: non overriding religious objects do not attract Explanation 3, registration directed under sect...
Search-assessment proviso jurisdiction, time-barred valuation reports, and denial of cross-examination vitiate valuation-based and confession-based ad...
Proceeds of crime: provisional attachment confirmed; equivalent value attachment and acquisition date fair market value upheld, Covid exclusion preser...
Page of 4813
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
5741 to 5760 of 96257 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 4813 
Join Channel 
