Search Results for "Income Tax recovery"

1005 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 1005 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Bombay at Goa Condones Delay in Tax Appeal Filed by Assessee Due to Lack of Notice and Ex-Parte ITAT Order; Litigant Should Not Suffer for Fault of Counsel, Delay of 40 Days Condoned Under Section 260A of Income Tax Act, 1961, on Payment of Costs.

Two Miscellaneous Civil Applications were filed before the High Court of Bombay at Goa by Neelam Ajit Phatarpekar, an assessee, and as legal heir of l...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Attachment and Sale of Residential Bungalow in Income Tax Recovery Proceedings. Order Beyond Limitation Period Under Rule 68B(3) of Second Schedule and Non-Compliance with Proclamation Requirements Render Sale Invalid.

The case involved a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the attachment and proposed sale of a residential bungalo...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Section 179 Order Against Former Director for Tax Dues of Company — No Evidence of Neglect or Misfeasance. Director Who Resigned Before Relevant Assessment Year Cannot Be Held Liable for Company's Tax Default Under Section 179 of Income Tax Act, 1961.

The petitioner, Dinesh T. Tailor, was appointed as an Additional director of Yazad Investment & Finance Private Limited on 2 January 1987. He signed a...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Hears Challenge to FIR Against Income Tax Officials: Sections 138 and 293 Income Tax Act Protection Argued. Court Examines Whether Notice Under Section 91 Cr.P.C. Can Override Statutory Safeguards in Search and Seizure Cases.

The writ petition was filed by income tax authorities under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Reopening Notice Under Section 148 of Income Tax Act, 1961 for Venture Capital Fund — No Failure to Disclose Material Facts. Reopening Based on Mere Change of Opinion on Applicability of Section 10(23FB) Exemption is Invalid.

The petitioner, DHFL Venture Capital Fund, is a trust registered as a venture capital fund under SEBI (Venture Capital Fund) Regulations, 1996. It fil...