Charitable trust income application permits verified capital expenditure but rejects deferred pre-operative claims and requires reconsideration of con...
Reinsurance premium deductions require established regulatory breaches, while independently acquired software qualifies within the computer depreciati...
Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Page of 4801
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
861 to 880 of 96001 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Insolvency and BankruptcyApril 22, 2024Case LawsAT
Release of assets (machines) seized by the Customs Authorities before initiation of CIRP - The tribunal found that the goods were lawfully confiscated under the Customs Act before the initiation of the CIRP. Therefore, the goods were no longer the property of the Corporate Debtor by the time the RP sought their release. It was noted that the order for confiscation was made after a proper show-cause notice and was not contested by the Corporate Debtor at that time. - The tribunal clarified that the ownership of the confiscated goods vested with the government immediately upon confiscation, irrespective of whether the redemption fine was paid. The option to redeem the goods by paying the fine was a separate matter that did not affect the fundamental status of ownership transfer upon confiscation.
Release of assets (machines) seized by the Customs Authorities before initiation of CIRP - The tribunal found that the goods were lawfully confiscated under the Customs Act before the initiation of the CIRP. Therefore, the goods were no longer the property of the Corporate Debtor by the time the RP sought their release. It was noted that the order for confiscation was made after a proper show-cause notice and was not contested by the Corporate Debtor at that time. - The tribunal clarified that the ownership of the confiscated goods vested with the government immediately upon confiscation, irrespective of whether the redemption fine was paid. The option to redeem the goods by paying the fine was a separate matter that did not affect the fundamental status of ownership transfer upon confiscation.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.