Opportunity to furnish unsecured-loan confirmations is required before reassessment initiation; proceedings require fresh consideration after taxpayer...
Under-reporting on a first reassessment return attracts penalty, while enhanced misreporting penalty requires proof of a statutory misreporting catego...
The NCLAT rejected the preliminary objections raised by the Corporate Debtor that the application u/s 9 filed by the Operational Creditor was barred by limitation. It held that the last payment was made on 26.08.2019, which was within three years, and there was an acknowledgment by the Corporate Debtor in writing reflected in the reply to the demand notice. As both conditions u/s 19 of the Limitation Act were fulfilled, the Operational Creditor was entitled to the benefit of extension of limitation. Consequently, the Section 9 application was well within the limitation period. The NCLAT dismissed the appeal.
The NCLAT rejected the preliminary objections raised by the Corporate Debtor that the application u/s 9 filed by the Operational Creditor was barred by limitation. It held that the last payment was made on 26.08.2019, which was within three years, and there was an acknowledgment by the Corporate Debtor in writing reflected in the reply to the demand notice. As both conditions u/s 19 of the Limitation Act were fulfilled, the Operational Creditor was entitled to the benefit of extension of limitation. Consequently, the Section 9 application was well within the limitation period. The NCLAT dismissed the appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4916 
