Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
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 4788
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
