Thursday, February 27, 2014

S. 254(2A): The Tribunal has no power to extend stay of demand beyond 365 days even if the assessee is not at fault. If dept seeks an adjournment, ITAT may either refuse it or dept should undertake not to recover the demand

CIT vs. Maruti Suzuki (India) Limited (Delhi High Court)

(i) In view of the third proviso to s. 254(2A) of the Act substituted by Finance Act, 2008 with effect from 1st October, 2008, the Tribunal cannot extend stay beyond the period of 365 days from the date of first order of stay

No comments:

Kolkata ITAT holds Husband's HUF not falling in the definition of ‘Relative’ of a Wife for gift-tax purposes under Income-tax

  Kolkata Tribunal has recently ruled that HUFs cannot be treated as “relatives” under the gift-tax provisions of the Income-tax Act, thereb...