https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275605 The Tribunal allowed the appeals, directing the Ld. CIT(A) to reconsider them. The delay in filing appeals was condoned as the appellant provided a valid explanation. The Tribunal clarified that separate appeals were not necessary for each remittance under section 195(2) unless they span multiple financial years. Regarding eligibility under section 248, the Tribunal instructed a re-examination considering the tax liability arrangement post-amendment by the Finance Act, 2007. All appeals were remanded for re-adjudication, allowing the appellant to raise legal and factual issues with supporting evidence. en-us Wed, 16 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 10 Oct 2018 09:06:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275605 The Tribunal allowed the appeals, directing the Ld. CIT(A) to reconsider them. The delay in filing appeals was condoned as the appellant provided a valid explanation. The Tribunal clarified that separate appeals were not necessary for each remittance under section 195(2) unless they span multiple financial years. Regarding eligibility under section 248, the Tribunal instructed a re-examination considering the tax liability arrangement post-amendment by the Finance Act, 2007. All appeals were remanded for re-adjudication, allowing the appellant to raise legal and factual issues with supporting evidence. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 16 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275605