https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187940 An appeal directed against a corrigendum was not entertained because it failed to raise any substantial question of law. The HC noted that the impugned challenge was aimed at the corrigendum rather than the substantive Tribunal order, and in any event no basis was shown to admit the appeal on merits. It further held that, even if the substantive order had been challenged, the appeal would have been time-barred because no prayer for amendment or condonation of delay was made. The appeal was therefore dismissed in limine, with no order as to costs. en-us Mon, 16 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 12 Nov 2016 11:11:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187940 An appeal directed against a corrigendum was not entertained because it failed to raise any substantial question of law. The HC noted that the impugned challenge was aimed at the corrigendum rather than the substantive Tribunal order, and in any event no basis was shown to admit the appeal on merits. It further held that, even if the substantive order had been challenged, the appeal would have been time-barred because no prayer for amendment or condonation of delay was made. The appeal was therefore dismissed in limine, with no order as to costs. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 16 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187940