Transfer-pricing tolerance for software sub-licensing falls within the services range, eliminating the adjustment and requiring TDS-credit verificatio...
Customs Broker due diligence requires prescribed KYC, not detecting misdeclarations discoverable only through physical examination, defeating licence ...
E-filing system failure permits exclusion of affected time in insolvency appeals, preventing tribunal technology defects from defeating timely filings...
Pre-existing disputes over outcome-based professional fees can bar Section 9 insolvency proceedings where contractual entitlement requires investigati...
Corresponding scheduled offences preserve money-laundering jurisdiction despite repeal of the central corruption provision where conduct remains cover...
Settlement applications filed by 30 September 2021 required only...
Settlement application eligibility requires a pending assessment when filed, preventing an extra prior-eligibility condition from blocking consideration.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
Settlement applications filed by 30 September 2021 required only that the relevant assessment case be pending on the application date; no statutory requirement imposed eligibility by an earlier date. The Board's deadline-relaxation power could not add a prior-eligibility condition absent from the statutory scheme. Where live, unadjudicated notices under sections 153A or 143(2) existed, eligibility could not depend on delayed notice issuance, and differing treatment of years arising from the same search lacked a rational basis. Paragraph 4(i) and the corresponding press release were read down; rejected applications were restored for decision on merits, with consequential assessments subject to that decision. The constitutional challenge to section 245C(5) remained open.
Settlement applications filed by 30 September 2021 required only that the relevant assessment case be pending on the application date; no statutory requirement imposed eligibility by an earlier date. The Board's deadline-relaxation power could not add a prior-eligibility condition absent from the statutory scheme. Where live, unadjudicated notices under sections 153A or 143(2) existed, eligibility could not depend on delayed notice issuance, and differing treatment of years arising from the same search lacked a rational basis. Paragraph 4(i) and the corresponding press release were read down; rejected applications were restored for decision on merits, with consequential assessments subject to that decision. The constitutional challenge to section 245C(5) remained open.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4883 
