https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14623 An application for modification of the tax benefit ceiling under section 72A had not been considered on merits because the earlier closure order was already in place when it reached the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction. The matter was therefore required to be examined afresh without being influenced by the earlier order. As the tax benefit dispute remained pending before the Board, enforcement of the income-tax demand was to remain in abeyance until the Board decided the application. The Board was directed to decide the application within two months. en-us Fri, 17 Apr 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 17 Jul 2009 16:05:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14623 An application for modification of the tax benefit ceiling under section 72A had not been considered on merits because the earlier closure order was already in place when it reached the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction. The matter was therefore required to be examined afresh without being influenced by the earlier order. As the tax benefit dispute remained pending before the Board, enforcement of the income-tax demand was to remain in abeyance until the Board decided the application. The Board was directed to decide the application within two months. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 17 Apr 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14623