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...
A registered sub-lease deed creating a first charge can constitute a security interest under the Insolvency Code, so NOIDA was not to be treated as an ordinary operational creditor and the resolution plan's distribution had to be reconsidered to that extent. By contrast, the lender's assignee could claim no higher security than the assignor, and its security over a real estate project was confined to unsold inventory because allotments to homebuyers were protected under RERA; the plan payment to the dissenting secured creditor therefore did not breach Sections 30(2)(b) or 53. Objections on valuation and plan comparison fell within the CoC's commercial wisdom, and no material irregularity was shown.
A registered sub-lease deed creating a first charge can constitute a security interest under the Insolvency Code, so NOIDA was not to be treated as an ordinary operational creditor and the resolution plan's distribution had to be reconsidered to that extent. By contrast, the lender's assignee could claim no higher security than the assignor, and its security over a real estate project was confined to unsold inventory because allotments to homebuyers were protected under RERA; the plan payment to the dissenting secured creditor therefore did not breach Sections 30(2)(b) or 53. Objections on valuation and plan comparison fell within the CoC's commercial wisdom, and no material irregularity was shown.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
