https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417726 The Tribunal condoned a 72-day delay in filing an appeal, citing the Supreme Court's order extending the limitation period. It found no negligence or mala fide intent, admitting the appeal for adjudication. Regarding the revision order under Section 263, the Tribunal quashed it, noting the retrospective omission of Section 92BA(1) by the Finance Act, 2017, making the non-reference to the TPO non-prejudicial. Consequently, the assessment by the AO was upheld, and the appeal of the assessee was allowed, based on established legal grounds from a precedent. en-us Mon, 17 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 31 Jan 2022 07:19:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417726 The Tribunal condoned a 72-day delay in filing an appeal, citing the Supreme Court's order extending the limitation period. It found no negligence or mala fide intent, admitting the appeal for adjudication. Regarding the revision order under Section 263, the Tribunal quashed it, noting the retrospective omission of Section 92BA(1) by the Finance Act, 2017, making the non-reference to the TPO non-prejudicial. Consequently, the assessment by the AO was upheld, and the appeal of the assessee was allowed, based on established legal grounds from a precedent. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 17 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417726