https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=412319 The court set aside the rejection order of the Section 270 (AA) application by Respondent No. 2 and remanded the matter for de-novo consideration by Respondent No. 1. The court clarified that the bar under Section 270 (AA) Sub-Section 6 does not prevent challenging rejection of an application seeking immunity from penalty. It held that there was no prohibition against challenging rejection orders, directing Respondent No. 1 to reconsider the petitioner's Section 264 application, ensuring a fair process with a personal hearing and document review. The court instructed Respondent No. 1 to issue a reasoned order within six weeks. en-us Wed, 08 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 15 Sep 2021 09:02:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=412319 The court set aside the rejection order of the Section 270 (AA) application by Respondent No. 2 and remanded the matter for de-novo consideration by Respondent No. 1. The court clarified that the bar under Section 270 (AA) Sub-Section 6 does not prevent challenging rejection of an application seeking immunity from penalty. It held that there was no prohibition against challenging rejection orders, directing Respondent No. 1 to reconsider the petitioner's Section 264 application, ensuring a fair process with a personal hearing and document review. The court instructed Respondent No. 1 to issue a reasoned order within six weeks. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 08 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=412319