PMLA anticipatory bail requires satisfaction of twin conditions, while predicate-offence protection does not extend to independent money-laundering pr...
School-affiliation charges remain taxable where not directly connected with examinations, while extended limitation requires proof of deliberate tax e...
Concessional penalty for search-disclosed unreconciled jewellery applies where substantive disclosure conditions are met despite omission from origina...
Page of 4826
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1 to 20 of 96510 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
An attachment and proclamation of sale under the tax recovery...
Attachment and proclamation of sale of immovable property: limitation treated from financial year end; proclamation held within period, petition dismissed
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
An attachment and proclamation of sale under the tax recovery scheme was challenged as barred by the threeyear limitation in Rule 68B. The court held that where a party bypasses seeking a certificate of appeal and files a special leave petition, the assessment did not attain finality until the Supreme Court dismissed the SLP, so limitation is reckoned from the end of that financial year; the challenged proclamation (12.06.2018) fell within the Limitation period and is valid. Failure to sell within the period triggers a statutory vacation of the attachment, but Part III does not extinguish other rights to recover dues; a subsequent limited certificate claim did not prevail. Writ petition dismissed.
An attachment and proclamation of sale under the tax recovery scheme was challenged as barred by the threeyear limitation in Rule 68B. The court held that where a party bypasses seeking a certificate of appeal and files a special leave petition, the assessment did not attain finality until the Supreme Court dismissed the SLP, so limitation is reckoned from the end of that financial year; the challenged proclamation (12.06.2018) fell within the Limitation period and is valid. Failure to sell within the period triggers a statutory vacation of the attachment, but Part III does not extinguish other rights to recover dues; a subsequent limited certificate claim did not prevail. Writ petition dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.