Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
Insolvency professional agency governance rules amended to add nominee directors, tighten independent director eligibility, and regulate managing dire...
After admitting an additional ground for deduction under section 32AC, the ITAT held that the appellate authority had to decide the claim on merits and could not refuse it merely because it was raised belatedly or on conduct-based objections already waived at admission. It further held that Goetz India Ltd. did not limit the appellate authority's power to entertain a fresh statutory claim supported by documents and capable of verification. However, because the remand report did not clearly confirm that the assets were new plant and machinery or that all statutory conditions were met, the matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination.
After admitting an additional ground for deduction under section 32AC, the ITAT held that the appellate authority had to decide the claim on merits and could not refuse it merely because it was raised belatedly or on conduct-based objections already waived at admission. It further held that Goetz India Ltd. did not limit the appellate authority's power to entertain a fresh statutory claim supported by documents and capable of verification. However, because the remand report did not clearly confirm that the assets were new plant and machinery or that all statutory conditions were met, the matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.