Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
Insolvency professional agency governance rules amended to add nominee directors, tighten independent director eligibility, and regulate managing dire...
Under the Sabka Vishwas Scheme, a liability admitted during enquiry or investigation was not treated as final quantification of duty by itself. Eligibility required the duty payable in the pending matter to be quantified on or before the statutory cut-off date, and a partial admission during investigation could not satisfy that requirement. On that basis, the rejection of the declaration was upheld because the tax liability had not been finally quantified by 30.06.2019. The hearing before the Designated Committee arose only after eligibility was established, so no prior hearing was required where the declarant was ex facie ineligible.
Under the Sabka Vishwas Scheme, a liability admitted during enquiry or investigation was not treated as final quantification of duty by itself. Eligibility required the duty payable in the pending matter to be quantified on or before the statutory cut-off date, and a partial admission during investigation could not satisfy that requirement. On that basis, the rejection of the declaration was upheld because the tax liability had not been finally quantified by 30.06.2019. The hearing before the Designated Committee arose only after eligibility was established, so no prior hearing was required where the declarant was ex facie ineligible.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4807 
Join Channel 
