<?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>2025 (1) TMI 376 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764314</link>
    <description>Limitation for filing the assessee&#039;s appeal had been computed by counting the Covid-19 period, despite Supreme Court directions requiring that period to be excluded. The first appellate authority therefore rejected the appeal at the threshold for delay. On the record, the matter required reconsideration on merits, and the proceedings were restored for fresh adjudication with an opportunity to the assessee to establish her case, including three effective hearings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Jan 2025 08:37:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=787175" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (1) TMI 376 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764314</link>
      <description>Limitation for filing the assessee&#039;s appeal had been computed by counting the Covid-19 period, despite Supreme Court directions requiring that period to be excluded. The first appellate authority therefore rejected the appeal at the threshold for delay. On the record, the matter required reconsideration on merits, and the proceedings were restored for fresh adjudication with an opportunity to the assessee to establish her case, including three effective hearings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764314</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>