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

1986 (5) TMI 39

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....appeal reads as follows: "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT (A) erred in allowing the carry forward of loss though the return was not filed within the time limit prescribed under s. 139 (1)." The assessee, a company in which public are not substantially interested, filed its return on 14th Sept., 1983 declaring a loss of Rs. 36,71,222. The ITO determin....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the ld. representative of the assessee Shri Panjwani brought to our notice the instructions of CBDT contained in the Circular dt. 14th March, 1985 under which it has been clarified that the instructions dt. 20th Sept., 1983 (relied upon by the ITO) would be effective from asst. yr. 1984-85 only. In this view of the matter, therefore, we do not see any reason to interfere with the decision of the ....