https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307818 The Court rejected the review application in Income Tax Appeal No. 55 of 2016 due to the absence of the physical registration certificate under Section 12A, despite verbal confirmation from the Commissioner of Income Tax's office. Emphasizing the necessity of tangible evidence, the Court held that the letter from the CIT's office could not serve as a substitute for the actual certificate. The lack of concrete proof during both the initial proceedings and the review process led to the dismissal of the review application, highlighting the importance of providing conclusive documentation to support legal claims. en-us Tue, 07 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 May 2023 21:17:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307818 The Court rejected the review application in Income Tax Appeal No. 55 of 2016 due to the absence of the physical registration certificate under Section 12A, despite verbal confirmation from the Commissioner of Income Tax's office. Emphasizing the necessity of tangible evidence, the Court held that the letter from the CIT's office could not serve as a substitute for the actual certificate. The lack of concrete proof during both the initial proceedings and the review process led to the dismissal of the review application, highlighting the importance of providing conclusive documentation to support legal claims. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 07 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307818