Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Sundararajan Raghunathan Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai)
Related Assessment Year : 2017-18
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sundararajan Raghunathan Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai) Vivad-Se-Vishwas Didn’t Mature — Appeal Can’t Die by Assumption The ITAT Chennai condoned a 168-day delay and set aside the CIT(A)’s order which had dismissed the appeal as “withdrawn” merely because the assessee had opted for Vivad-Se-Vishwas, 2020. The assessee had filed Form-3 under the Scheme, which the CIT(A) himself acknowledged, but the assessee could not make payment by 31.03.2021 due to financial distress. Consequently, the dispute was never settled under the Scheme. Despite this, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without adjudi...
This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.

Author Bio

CA Vijayakumar Shetty qualified in 1994 and in practice since then. Founding partner of Shetty & Co. He is a graduate from St Aloysius College, Mangalore . View Full Profile

My Published Posts

Penny Stock Addition Fails: ITAT Says Suspicion Cannot Replace Evidence Borrowed Satisfaction: ITAT Quashes Penny Stock Additions in Multiple Family Cases Statement Alone Cannot Justify ‘On-Money’ Addition: ITAT Mumbai Genuine ITR Mistake Cannot Lead to Tax on Wrong Income: ITAT Mumbai AO Cannot Reopen on the Same Material Examined in U/s 153C Assessment: ITAT Quashes ₹2.90 Crore Addition View More Published Posts

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Search Post by Date
June 2026
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930