Transaction value cannot be rejected solely on non-statutory valuation guidelines without corroborative evidence supporting reassessment of final cust...
Cross-examination rights and corroborated evidence limit customs penalties for misdeclaration in genuine import transactions involving documented clea...
Tariff classification of vehicle gear components follows the specific gearing entry, displacing motor-vehicle parts classification and related liabili...
Necessary-party requirements limit impleadment of independent entities, while deferred consideration does not create an appealable adverse determinati...
Food supplement classification requires common parlance and authoritative tests, preventing treatment as proprietary Ayurvedic medicines without suppo...
Specified regulatory authority income receives conditional tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income character, and return f...
Tax exemption for regulatory authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-filing...
Page of 4796
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
601 to 620 of 95918 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Interim stay applications over admission of an electricity distribution licensee into CIRP turned on the asserted primacy of the Insolvency Code over the Electricity Act and the alleged invalidity of a corporate guarantee for want of regulatory approval. One Member held that existing Supreme Court authority foreclosed the Electricity Act objection and that a disputed approval issue did not by itself make the guarantee fraudulent, coercive, or void, so no stay was warranted. The other Member distinguished that authority, stressing the effect of CIRP on the licensed business and consumers and preferring the less injurious course. With this difference of opinion, the Bench made no final determination on interim relief and referred the matter.
Interim stay applications over admission of an electricity distribution licensee into CIRP turned on the asserted primacy of the Insolvency Code over the Electricity Act and the alleged invalidity of a corporate guarantee for want of regulatory approval. One Member held that existing Supreme Court authority foreclosed the Electricity Act objection and that a disputed approval issue did not by itself make the guarantee fraudulent, coercive, or void, so no stay was warranted. The other Member distinguished that authority, stressing the effect of CIRP on the licensed business and consumers and preferring the less injurious course. With this difference of opinion, the Bench made no final determination on interim relief and referred the matter.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.