<?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 (4) TMI 1365 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769451</link>
    <description>The SC quashed the CIT(Exemptions)&#039;s order rejecting a condonation application for Form-10B filing delay. The Court held that for delays exceeding one year, particularly beyond three years, only the CBDT has jurisdiction. The impugned order was set aside, and the CBDT was directed to consider the application on merits within four months, providing an opportunity for hearing and passing a reasoned order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2025 08:53:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=817075" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (4) TMI 1365 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769451</link>
      <description>The SC quashed the CIT(Exemptions)&#039;s order rejecting a condonation application for Form-10B filing delay. The Court held that for delays exceeding one year, particularly beyond three years, only the CBDT has jurisdiction. The impugned order was set aside, and the CBDT was directed to consider the application on merits within four months, providing an opportunity for hearing and passing a reasoned order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769451</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>