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...
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.