https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21891 The High Court held that an appeal before the Assistant Commissioner was not maintainable against an order passed under section 184(4) of the Income-tax Act. The court emphasized that no appeal lies against a declaration refusal beyond the allowed period without sufficient cause. The firm's appeal was dismissed, affirming the decision of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The High Court ruled in favor of the Revenue, denying the maintainability of the appeal and indicating no order as to costs. Judge J. M. Mahapatra concurred with the judgment. en-us Wed, 12 Sep 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 02 Dec 2009 18:34:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21891 The High Court held that an appeal before the Assistant Commissioner was not maintainable against an order passed under section 184(4) of the Income-tax Act. The court emphasized that no appeal lies against a declaration refusal beyond the allowed period without sufficient cause. The firm's appeal was dismissed, affirming the decision of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The High Court ruled in favor of the Revenue, denying the maintainability of the appeal and indicating no order as to costs. Judge J. M. Mahapatra concurred with the judgment. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 12 Sep 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21891