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...
Scope of Deposits - amounts collected by the petitioners for sale of immovable property as advance - would come under the purview of ‘deposits’ or would exempt from the purview of ‘deposits’ by virtue of Rule 2(1) (c) (xii) (b) of the Companies (Acceptance of Deposits) Rules, 2014? - the advances received by the 1st petitioner for sale of immovable property are exempted from the purview of the deposits - in view of the proviso to Rule 2 (1) (c) (xii) (b) of the Companies (Acceptance of Deposits) Rules, 2014, the continuation of proceedings against the petitioners/A-1 to A-5 would amount to abuse of process of the Court. - HC
Scope of Deposits - amounts collected by the petitioners for sale of immovable property as advance - would come under the purview of ‘deposits’ or would exempt from the purview of ‘deposits’ by virtue of Rule 2(1) (c) (xii) (b) of the Companies (Acceptance of Deposits) Rules, 2014? - the advances received by the 1st petitioner for sale of immovable property are exempted from the purview of the deposits - in view of the proviso to Rule 2 (1) (c) (xii) (b) of the Companies (Acceptance of Deposits) Rules, 2014, the continuation of proceedings against the petitioners/A-1 to A-5 would amount to abuse of process of the Court. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4786
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
