https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=62585 The Tribunal dismissed the appeals challenging penalties under sections 271(1)(a) and 273(1)(b) as well as additions/disallowances under section 143(3) due to delay in filing. The Tribunal found the reasons provided for the delay, such as partner's illness and firm closure, insufficient. Despite arguments for condonation, including interim stay and health issues, the Tribunal held that the delay was not adequately justified, leading to the dismissal of the appeals as out of time. The department's stance on separate proceedings for stay and delay condonation prevailed, resulting in the rejection of the appeals. en-us Mon, 22 May 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 11 Jul 2022 15:03:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=62585 The Tribunal dismissed the appeals challenging penalties under sections 271(1)(a) and 273(1)(b) as well as additions/disallowances under section 143(3) due to delay in filing. The Tribunal found the reasons provided for the delay, such as partner's illness and firm closure, insufficient. Despite arguments for condonation, including interim stay and health issues, the Tribunal held that the delay was not adequately justified, leading to the dismissal of the appeals as out of time. The department's stance on separate proceedings for stay and delay condonation prevailed, resulting in the rejection of the appeals. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 22 May 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=62585