Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
Insolvency professional agency governance rules amended to add nominee directors, tighten independent director eligibility, and regulate managing dire...
Blocking of input tax credit under Rule 86-A requires the competent authority to record reasons to believe in writing before exercising the power. The High Court held that a bare statement alleging fraudulent availment of ITC, without disclosure of the supporting reasons in the order itself, is a jurisdictional defect. Reasons supplied later through affidavit or instructions could not cure the invalidity, because the legality of the order must be tested on the reasons recorded at the time of decision. The blocking order was set aside, with liberty to pass a fresh order in accordance with law.
Blocking of input tax credit under Rule 86-A requires the competent authority to record reasons to believe in writing before exercising the power. The High Court held that a bare statement alleging fraudulent availment of ITC, without disclosure of the supporting reasons in the order itself, is a jurisdictional defect. Reasons supplied later through affidavit or instructions could not cure the invalidity, because the legality of the order must be tested on the reasons recorded at the time of decision. The blocking order was set aside, with liberty to pass a fresh order in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.