<?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>2020 (12) TMI 84 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401285</link>
    <description>The HC condoned the delay in filing appeals under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, acknowledging the Tribunal&#039;s error in dismissing appeals due to non-appearance. The Court accepted the argument that the limitation period should commence from the date of knowledge of the order. The delay was justified due to the lockdown, and the appeals were restored for hearing on merits, subject to costs of Rs. 10,000 per appeal to be paid to the Revenue within three weeks.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Nov 2024 13:15:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=629232" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (12) TMI 84 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401285</link>
      <description>The HC condoned the delay in filing appeals under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, acknowledging the Tribunal&#039;s error in dismissing appeals due to non-appearance. The Court accepted the argument that the limitation period should commence from the date of knowledge of the order. The delay was justified due to the lockdown, and the appeals were restored for hearing on merits, subject to costs of Rs. 10,000 per appeal to be paid to the Revenue within three weeks.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401285</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>