Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :
        Insolvency and Bankruptcy

        2022 (5) TMI 1478 - AT - Insolvency and Bankruptcy

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Preferential transaction analysis under insolvency law requires strict proof of Section 43 ingredients before reclassifying converted advance payments. Advance payments made for future supply of goods were later converted into a loan arrangement after the corporate debtor could not supply the goods, ...
                      Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                          Preferential transaction analysis under insolvency law requires strict proof of Section 43 ingredients before reclassifying converted advance payments.

                          Advance payments made for future supply of goods were later converted into a loan arrangement after the corporate debtor could not supply the goods, raising a question under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code on whether the transaction was preferential. The NCLAT noted that Section 43 requires satisfaction of statutory ingredients, including a transfer for the benefit of a creditor on account of antecedent debt and a resulting preference over Section 53 distribution. It also stressed that the matter could not be conclusively treated as preferential, or the related-party question decided, without a proper avoidance application and fresh examination of the transaction's true character. The impugned order was therefore set aside and the matter remanded for reconsideration.




                          Issues: (i) Whether the conversion of advance payments made under the memorandum of understanding into a loan agreement amounted to a preferential transaction under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. (ii) Whether the impugned order rejecting the claim and treating the transaction as preferential could be sustained, or the matter required reconsideration.

                          Issue (i): Whether the conversion of advance payments made under the memorandum of understanding into a loan agreement amounted to a preferential transaction under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

                          Analysis: The advance payments were originally made for future supply of gold coins and ornaments and, at inception, bore the character of an operational transaction connected with supply of goods. The later conversion into a loan arrangement occurred in the context of the corporate debtor's inability to supply the goods. For a transaction to be avoided as preferential, the statutory requirements under Section 43 must be satisfied, including a transfer of property or an interest thereof for the benefit of a creditor on account of antecedent debt and a resulting beneficial position compared with distribution under Section 53. The Bench also noted that the transaction was not shown to be outside the ordinary course of business merely because it was later structured as a loan, and the record did not justify treating the whole amount as preferential without a proper avoidance application.

                          Conclusion: The transaction could not be conclusively sustained as a preferential transaction in respect of the entire amount on the basis adopted in the impugned order.

                          Issue (ii): Whether the impugned order rejecting the claim and treating the transaction as preferential could be sustained, or the matter required reconsideration.

                          Analysis: The Adjudicating Authority had gone beyond the proper scope of the proceedings by recording findings that effectively treated the appellant as a related party and by deciding the preference issue without a proper avoidance application under Section 43(1). The Bench held that the matter required a fresh examination on its own merits, including the true nature of the transaction and the extent, if any, to which the look-back period could apply. The impugned order was therefore not fit to stand and the dispute had to be reconsidered by the Adjudicating Authority without being influenced by the earlier findings.

                          Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh consideration.

                          Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded to the extent that the earlier decision was annulled and the controversy over classification of the claim and alleged preferential nature of the transaction was sent back for reconsideration in accordance with law.

                          Ratio Decidendi: A transaction cannot be finally branded as preferential without satisfying the statutory ingredients of Section 43 and without proper adjudication on the avoidance issue; if the original commercial arrangement is later restructured, the legal character of the transaction must be determined on a fresh and reasoned examination of the statutory requirements.


                          Full Summary is available for active users!
                          Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                          Topics

                          ActsIncome Tax
                          No Records Found