https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752590 ITAT dismissed the claim for condonation of delay, finding no satisfactory proof of absence of negligence or diligence and confirmed the impugned order on that aspect. However, ITAT directed the ld. CIT(A) to instruct the AO to treat the assessee's returns dated 11.09.2018 as rectification petitions under s.154 read with s.139C, call for audited accounts or other material, decide by a speaking order after hearing the assessee in a time-bound manner. Appeals were allowed for statistical purposes. en-us Fri, 10 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 17 Sep 2025 13:06:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752590 ITAT dismissed the claim for condonation of delay, finding no satisfactory proof of absence of negligence or diligence and confirmed the impugned order on that aspect. However, ITAT directed the ld. CIT(A) to instruct the AO to treat the assessee's returns dated 11.09.2018 as rectification petitions under s.154 read with s.139C, call for audited accounts or other material, decide by a speaking order after hearing the assessee in a time-bound manner. Appeals were allowed for statistical purposes. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 10 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752590