https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762476 The Bombay HC allowed the petitioner's challenge against rejection of their appeal and rectification application by tax authorities. The Commissioner had rejected the appeal citing defective board resolution, but the HC found no serious defect warranting rejection. The court noted the same officer had rejected nearly hundred similar matters on allegedly defective resolutions. Referring to precedent in Delphi World Money Ltd. case, the HC had previously interfered with identical orders by the same officer on similar grounds. The HC directed the second respondent to dispose of the appeal expeditiously, setting a deadline of 31 January 2025 for completion. en-us Thu, 21 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 18 Jul 2025 13:22:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762476 The Bombay HC allowed the petitioner's challenge against rejection of their appeal and rectification application by tax authorities. The Commissioner had rejected the appeal citing defective board resolution, but the HC found no serious defect warranting rejection. The court noted the same officer had rejected nearly hundred similar matters on allegedly defective resolutions. Referring to precedent in Delphi World Money Ltd. case, the HC had previously interfered with identical orders by the same officer on similar grounds. The HC directed the second respondent to dispose of the appeal expeditiously, setting a deadline of 31 January 2025 for completion. Case-Laws GST Thu, 21 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762476