Stock-in-trade transfer taxability follows possession and consideration, not later conveyance registration, limiting deemed-value provisions to the ac...
Alternative statutory remedy under GST bars writ challenge where classification, notice variance, and hearing disputes require factual appellate revie...
Duplicate PAN cancellation timeframe requires prior administrative representation before judicial intervention, ensuring a time-bound decision on the ...
Fair opportunity to a non-party affected by insolvency proceedings requires consideration of its pending intervention application before final adjudication of the Section 7 company petition. The application under Section 60(5) alleged collusive initiation of insolvency proceedings and asserted potential effects on the applicant's rights and property. In the stated circumstances, judicial fairness required the Tribunal to determine that application first because no compelling urgency justified finalising the insolvency petition while it remained pending. The Tribunal was directed to decide the application within three months, if not already decided, and thereafter determine the insolvency petition on merits.
Fair opportunity to a non-party affected by insolvency proceedings requires consideration of its pending intervention application before final adjudication of the Section 7 company petition. The application under Section 60(5) alleged collusive initiation of insolvency proceedings and asserted potential effects on the applicant's rights and property. In the stated circumstances, judicial fairness required the Tribunal to determine that application first because no compelling urgency justified finalising the insolvency petition while it remained pending. The Tribunal was directed to decide the application within three months, if not already decided, and thereafter determine the insolvency petition on merits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4888 
