Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Page of 4798
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
821 to 840 of 95955 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
