Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
Insolvency and BankruptcyApril 16, 2024Case LawsSCH
Admissibility of section 9 application - The Appellant argued that the application under the IBC should not have been admitted due to the pendency of a civil suit. However, the Supreme Court held that the existence of a pending civil suit does not preclude the admission of an application under the IBC if there is a genuine dispute regarding the debt. They cited the principle established in Mobilox Innovations Private Limited Vs. Kirusa Software Private Limited [2017 (9) TMI 1270 - SUPREME COURT], emphasizing that the adjudicating authority is only required to determine whether there is a plausible contention for further investigation. Ultimately, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the decision of the lower tribunals to admit the application under the IBC and initiate CIRP against the Corporate Debtor.
Admissibility of section 9 application - The Appellant argued that the application under the IBC should not have been admitted due to the pendency of a civil suit. However, the Supreme Court held that the existence of a pending civil suit does not preclude the admission of an application under the IBC if there is a genuine dispute regarding the debt. They cited the principle established in Mobilox Innovations Private Limited Vs. Kirusa Software Private Limited [2017 (9) TMI 1270 - SUPREME COURT], emphasizing that the adjudicating authority is only required to determine whether there is a plausible contention for further investigation. Ultimately, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the decision of the lower tribunals to admit the application under the IBC and initiate CIRP against the Corporate Debtor.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
