Religious purpose exclusion versus charitable purpose: non overriding religious objects do not attract Explanation 3, registration directed under sect...
Search-assessment proviso jurisdiction, time-barred valuation reports, and denial of cross-examination vitiate valuation-based and confession-based ad...
Proceeds of crime: provisional attachment confirmed; equivalent value attachment and acquisition date fair market value upheld, Covid exclusion preser...
On approval of a resolution plan, Section 32A of the IBC protects the corporate debtor on a clean slate basis, so attachment of its property for prior offences cannot continue and the impugned MPID notification was liable to be quashed to that extent. The HC also held that vesting under the MPID Act remains inchoate until the Designated Court makes the attachment absolute; absent such an order, the property had not finally vested in the Competent Authority and remained available to the resolution plan. The writ was maintainable because the issue was a pure question of law, despite the alternative forum.
On approval of a resolution plan, Section 32A of the IBC protects the corporate debtor on a clean slate basis, so attachment of its property for prior offences cannot continue and the impugned MPID notification was liable to be quashed to that extent. The HC also held that vesting under the MPID Act remains inchoate until the Designated Court makes the attachment absolute; absent such an order, the property had not finally vested in the Competent Authority and remained available to the resolution plan. The writ was maintainable because the issue was a pure question of law, despite the alternative forum.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
