Loading...

⚠ โœ•
❮ Top
☎ Help
Draft upto 3 replies to a
tax notice โ€” FREE ๐ŸŽ‰ โœ•

150 credits ยท 30 days

โ€ข Basic Search โ†’ 1 Credit
โ€ข Advanced Search โ†’ 3 Credits
โ€ข Drafter โ†’ 20 to extract + 25 per issue
(โ‰ˆ upto 2-3 drafts on us)

Already used our earlier 20-Credit Demo?
You are still eligible for this new 150-Credit Demo.

Activate your FREE Demo โ†’
☰
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedbackโœ•

Contact Us At :

✉ E-mail: [email protected]

✆ Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters 0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

1999 (9) TMI 901

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Shri S. Kannan, DR, for the Respondent. [Order per : S.L. Peeran, Member (J) (Oral)]. -  This appeal arises from the Order-in-Appeal No. 33/99, dated 25-2-1999 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) rejecting the appeal solely on the ground of time-bar. As the issue lies in a short compass, therefore, the appeal itself is taken up for disposal by condoning the delay of 41 days in filin....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....delay of seven days in filing the appeal before him and the reason given by the appellant was an afterthought. Appellant had contended before the Commissioner (Appeals) that he was not in station and being the proprietor he could not engage another person to file the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). He has not accepted the reason given by the appellant and held that there was gross neglig....