<?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>2009 (4) TMI 55 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33273</link>
    <description>Refusal to condone delay in filing an appeal is treated as an affirmation of the assessment order, so the appellate forum may still entertain the dispute and examine it on merits. On that principle, the Tribunal was justified in setting aside the first appellate order and remitting the matter for fresh consideration after the appeal had been dismissed as time-barred without merits review. The Court also noted that the remand was consistent with the agreed course adopted in a similar matter pending the jurisdictional High Court&#039;s decision on the underlying issue. No interference was warranted, and the Tribunal&#039;s remand order was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 20 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 03 May 2010 12:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=71906" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (4) TMI 55 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33273</link>
      <description>Refusal to condone delay in filing an appeal is treated as an affirmation of the assessment order, so the appellate forum may still entertain the dispute and examine it on merits. On that principle, the Tribunal was justified in setting aside the first appellate order and remitting the matter for fresh consideration after the appeal had been dismissed as time-barred without merits review. The Court also noted that the remand was consistent with the agreed course adopted in a similar matter pending the jurisdictional High Court&#039;s decision on the underlying issue. No interference was warranted, and the Tribunal&#039;s remand order was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33273</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>