<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2002 (10) TMI 265 - ITAT RAJKOT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=71250</link>
    <description>The ITAT allowed all appeals, stressing a justice-oriented approach in interpreting &quot;sufficient cause&quot; for condonation of delay under the IT Act. Emphasizing the importance of advancing substantial justice, the ITAT considered the overall circumstances, condoned the delay due to negligence of the tax consultant without mala fide intent, and remanded the matter for a decision on the merits, subject to costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Oct 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 Apr 2011 11:37:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=109579" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (10) TMI 265 - ITAT RAJKOT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=71250</link>
      <description>The ITAT allowed all appeals, stressing a justice-oriented approach in interpreting &quot;sufficient cause&quot; for condonation of delay under the IT Act. Emphasizing the importance of advancing substantial justice, the ITAT considered the overall circumstances, condoned the delay due to negligence of the tax consultant without mala fide intent, and remanded the matter for a decision on the merits, subject to costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Oct 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=71250</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>