Revenue neutrality in domestic related-party loans can require deletion of interest transfer pricing adjustments after domestic-transaction verificati...
Pre-enactment land-sale agreements escape stamp-duty value substitution where substantial banking-channel consideration was received before Section 43...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
121 to 140 of 95833 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 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 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
