Reassessment under s.148A held valid; s.69 additions totaling Rs.7,00,000 deleted after acceptable contemporaneous explanations for property investmen...
Adjudication set aside; Rule 9 valuation based on internet engineer report quashed for Rule 3(4) non-compliance; Section 138B cross-examination requir...
The HC held that section 458A prescribes a clear, unambiguous four-year limitation (three years plus one) for recovery actions following a winding-up order, commencing from the date of the winding-up order and excluding the period between commencement of winding-up proceedings and the winding-up order. Consequently, the Single Judge's conclusion that limitation commences from filing of the statement of affairs was set aside. Because the winding-up order merged with the appellate order dated 06.03.2020, limitation for continuation of proceedings began from that date. The application filed by the Official Liquidator on 13.09.2020 fell within the statutory period under section 458A. Appeal dismissed.
The HC held that section 458A prescribes a clear, unambiguous four-year limitation (three years plus one) for recovery actions following a winding-up order, commencing from the date of the winding-up order and excluding the period between commencement of winding-up proceedings and the winding-up order. Consequently, the Single Judge's conclusion that limitation commences from filing of the statement of affairs was set aside. Because the winding-up order merged with the appellate order dated 06.03.2020, limitation for continuation of proceedings began from that date. The application filed by the Official Liquidator on 13.09.2020 fell within the statutory period under section 458A. Appeal dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
