Search: condonation of delay

2 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 36(1)(viii)clear

Sorted by relevance

Key Topics

Section 808 Section 80I6 Section 143(3)4 Section 144C2 Section 92C2 Section 92B2 Transfer Pricing2 Deduction2 Comparables/TP2

KARAM SAFETY PRIVATE LIMITED,SITARGANJ vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3)(5), UDHAM SINGH NAGAR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the Stay Applications are dismissed

ITA 24/DDN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun23 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Nageshwar Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Pramod Verma, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 80Section 80ISection 92BSection 92C

36,33,150/-. 13. Thus, the AO / National Faceless Assessment Centre (“NFAC”) while issuing the final assessment order, has completely erred in law by issuing the assessment order in the name of the non-existent partnership firm. 14. The other facts pertaining to intimation of the conversion of the assessee from partnership firm to private limited company to the revenue

KARAM SAFETY PRIVATE LIMITED,UDHAM SINGH NAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3)(5), UDHAM SINGH NAGAR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the Stay Applications are dismissed

ITA 3/DDN/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun23 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Nageshwar Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Pramod Verma, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 80Section 80ISection 92BSection 92C