https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456144 ITAT Ahmedabad condoned 101-day delay in filing appeal, accepting assessee's explanation of communication gap between CA and counsel as sufficient cause. The Tribunal relied on precedent allowing condonation of even 492-day delay where assessee had bona fide impression appeal was filed. On merits, ITAT allowed assessee's appeal finding the AO exceeded jurisdiction in limited scrutiny assessment by disallowing commission and purchases beyond scope of section 143(2) notice, which only covered interest expenses and related party mismatches, not bogus transactions or section 14A disallowances. en-us Fri, 23 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 02 Jul 2024 19:57:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456144 ITAT Ahmedabad condoned 101-day delay in filing appeal, accepting assessee's explanation of communication gap between CA and counsel as sufficient cause. The Tribunal relied on precedent allowing condonation of even 492-day delay where assessee had bona fide impression appeal was filed. On merits, ITAT allowed assessee's appeal finding the AO exceeded jurisdiction in limited scrutiny assessment by disallowing commission and purchases beyond scope of section 143(2) notice, which only covered interest expenses and related party mismatches, not bogus transactions or section 14A disallowances. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 23 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456144