Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
221 to 240 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Section 96 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code creates an interim moratorium from the filing of an application under Sections 94 or 95 until admission, staying pending debt proceedings and barring fresh legal action on the debt during that period. A money recovery suit filed while that embargo operated was therefore barred by law and liable to rejection under Order VII Rule 11(d). The later insertion of Section 96(4) did not cure an earlier filing, and lack of knowledge of the insolvency proceedings was immaterial because the bar operated by statute. The plaint could not be split against some defendants on a joint and several liability theory once the statutory prohibition applied.
Section 96 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code creates an interim moratorium from the filing of an application under Sections 94 or 95 until admission, staying pending debt proceedings and barring fresh legal action on the debt during that period. A money recovery suit filed while that embargo operated was therefore barred by law and liable to rejection under Order VII Rule 11(d). The later insertion of Section 96(4) did not cure an earlier filing, and lack of knowledge of the insolvency proceedings was immaterial because the bar operated by statute. The plaint could not be split against some defendants on a joint and several liability theory once the statutory prohibition applied.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.