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...
Merchant banker regulation consolidates registration, governance, capital, reporting, outsourcing and investor-protection requirements under an update...
Jurisdiction of NCLT - Constitution of its Benches - Competency of Member of the Tribunal to function as a Bench - The Court interprets Section 419(3) of the Companies Act, 2013, and concludes that the proviso allows a single Judicial Member to exercise the powers of the Tribunal if authorized by the President. In this case, the President did authorize a Special Bench comprising of a single Member (Judicial) for specific dates, including the date of the judgment. - The Supreme Court finds that the NCLT did have jurisdiction to admit the application under Section 9 IBC 2016. - Therefore, the appeal was allowed, and the CIRP proceedings were directed to continue as per the Code.
Jurisdiction of NCLT - Constitution of its Benches - Competency of Member of the Tribunal to function as a Bench - The Court interprets Section 419(3) of the Companies Act, 2013, and concludes that the proviso allows a single Judicial Member to exercise the powers of the Tribunal if authorized by the President. In this case, the President did authorize a Special Bench comprising of a single Member (Judicial) for specific dates, including the date of the judgment. - The Supreme Court finds that the NCLT did have jurisdiction to admit the application under Section 9 IBC 2016. - Therefore, the appeal was allowed, and the CIRP proceedings were directed to continue as per the Code.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.