Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
Recovery proceedings - attaching the property and bringing the property for sale - The High Court observed that the impugned actions were indeed barred by Rule 68B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Since the attachment was made on 20.12.2018 and the sale notice was issued on 27.03.2019, after the conclusion of the relevant financial year in 2010, they were beyond the prescribed time limit. Relying on Rule 68B (1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the Court held that no sale of immovable property could be made after the expiry of the specified time limit. Consequently, the impugned actions were deemed barred by limitation, and the attachment over the petitioner's immovable property was set aside.
Recovery proceedings - attaching the property and bringing the property for sale - The High Court observed that the impugned actions were indeed barred by Rule 68B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Since the attachment was made on 20.12.2018 and the sale notice was issued on 27.03.2019, after the conclusion of the relevant financial year in 2010, they were beyond the prescribed time limit. Relying on Rule 68B (1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the Court held that no sale of immovable property could be made after the expiry of the specified time limit. Consequently, the impugned actions were deemed barred by limitation, and the attachment over the petitioner's immovable property was set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
