Special leave petition dismissed; deposits made during investigation are not deductible under Section 124(2) of SVLDRS 2019 The SC dismissed the special leave petition challenging the HC's interpretation of Section 124(2) of the SVLDRS 2019. The HC had held that deposits ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Special leave petition dismissed; deposits made during investigation are not deductible under Section 124(2) of SVLDRS 2019
The SC dismissed the special leave petition challenging the HC's interpretation of Section 124(2) of the SVLDRS 2019. The HC had held that deposits remitted by the appellant during the pendency of the investigation were not eligible for deduction under Section 124(2), as they did not fall within the statutory scope. The SC declined to interfere with that conclusion and upheld the impugned judgment.
The court refused to disturb the impugned judgment, stating: "We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment; hence, the present special leave petition is dismissed." The order disposes of the petition by dismissal and directs that "Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of." Key legal terminology retained: "impugned judgment," "special leave petition," "dismissed," and "Pending application(s) ... disposed of." No substantive reasoning or factual findings are recorded in the brief order; the disposition is summary and final as to the petition and attendant applications.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
