Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
Page of 4798
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
701 to 720 of 95955 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NCLAT held that a concluded liquidation auction could not be set aside merely because a higher price was expected where the e-auction was publicly advertised, properly conducted, and free from fraud, collusion, underbidding or any fundamental procedural defect. It found that the earlier Lot 2 bid covered the entire area, while the additional land emerged as a separate plot after subdivision; the liquidator's earlier communications were only part of a price-discovery exercise and not a private sale. The successful bidder was an aggrieved person entitled to appeal, and the order for re-auction was reversed, with the sale restored and the sale certificate directed to be issued.
NCLAT held that a concluded liquidation auction could not be set aside merely because a higher price was expected where the e-auction was publicly advertised, properly conducted, and free from fraud, collusion, underbidding or any fundamental procedural defect. It found that the earlier Lot 2 bid covered the entire area, while the additional land emerged as a separate plot after subdivision; the liquidator's earlier communications were only part of a price-discovery exercise and not a private sale. The successful bidder was an aggrieved person entitled to appeal, and the order for re-auction was reversed, with the sale restored and the sale certificate directed to be issued.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.