Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
The HC held that since the petitioner failed to pay the...
Petitioner ineligible for SVLDRS 2019 benefits due to non-payment within stipulated period; subsequent recoveries treated as arrears under Finance Act.
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
The HC held that since the petitioner failed to pay the determined amount under SVLDRS Form-3 within the stipulated period, the petitioner could not avail the benefit offered under the SVLDRS, 2019 scheme. The amounts recovered by the Department were not payments made within the scheme's period but subsequent recoveries of arrears u/s 87 of the Finance Act, 1994. As the petitioner became the firm's Managing Partner after the reconstituted partnership deed, the HC found no merit in challenging the attachment order and dismissed the petition.
The HC held that since the petitioner failed to pay the determined amount under SVLDRS Form-3 within the stipulated period, the petitioner could not avail the benefit offered under the SVLDRS, 2019 scheme. The amounts recovered by the Department were not payments made within the scheme's period but subsequent recoveries of arrears u/s 87 of the Finance Act, 1994. As the petitioner became the firm's Managing Partner after the reconstituted partnership deed, the HC found no merit in challenging the attachment order and dismissed the petition.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4790
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
