Overlapping GST proceedings require Central and State authorities to designate one competent authority for coordinated adjudication of the same matter...
Composite healthcare supplies retain exemption when patient care is the contract's essential character, despite payment through an implementing agency...
Receipt of immovable property requires actual possession or enjoyment; redevelopment allotments exchanged for tenancy rights fall outside deemed incom...
Section 80P deduction covers Souharda credit societies, including qualifying surplus-deposit interest, subject to member KYC verification for cash dep...
Insolvency and BankruptcyMarch 13, 2024Case LawsHC
Constitutional validity - Disciplinary proceedings against insolvency professional agencies - suspension of authorization for assignment - Regulation 23A is liable to be struck down or not - violation of principles of natural justice - Section 204 of IBC is violative of Article 20(2) of the Constitution of India or not - The court dismissed the petitioner's contentions regarding the arbitrary nature of Regulation 23A, its conferral of excessive power on IPAs, and its violation of natural justice principles. - The court upheld the validity of Section 204 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, rejecting the petitioner's argument. The petitioner is virtually assailing correctness of the findings before the self same Court and pleading for re-consideration of the issue, which is nothing but an appeal in disguise, which cannot be entertained by this Court.
Constitutional validity - Disciplinary proceedings against insolvency professional agencies - suspension of authorization for assignment - Regulation 23A is liable to be struck down or not - violation of principles of natural justice - Section 204 of IBC is violative of Article 20(2) of the Constitution of India or not - The court dismissed the petitioner's contentions regarding the arbitrary nature of Regulation 23A, its conferral of excessive power on IPAs, and its violation of natural justice principles. - The court upheld the validity of Section 204 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, rejecting the petitioner's argument. The petitioner is virtually assailing correctness of the findings before the self same Court and pleading for re-consideration of the issue, which is nothing but an appeal in disguise, which cannot be entertained by this Court.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4811 
Join Channel 
