Case Law Details
Case Name : Safari Mercantile Private Limited vs. ITAT (Bombay High Court)
Related Assessment Year : 23/06/2016
Courts :
All High Courts Bombay High Court
Become a Premium member to Download.
If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored
The grievance of the petitioner as articulated by its counsel is that the Miscellaneous Application under Section 254(2) of the Act was for hearing before the Tribunal consequent to the order dated 31st July, 2007 of this Court. At this stage the Tribunal could not have decided the merits of the dispute namely the effect of nonservice of a demand notice on penalty proceedings and dismissed the Miscellaneous Application. The scope of an application under Section 254(2) of the Act was only whether or not there was an error apparent on record. In view of the orde
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Sponsored
Kindly Refer to
Privacy Policy &
Complete Terms of Use and Disclaimer.