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...
The NCLAT upheld the order of NCLAT dismissing an application for resolution as the Corporate Debtor's name was struck off by the RoC. The application under Section 9 was questioned whether it was for winding up or CIRP initiation. The Tribunal clarified that winding up involves company dissolution and asset liquidation for creditor payment, while CIRP aims at company revival. The Code is not a debt recovery mechanism but a revival tool. CIRP safeguards the Corporate Debtor's interests and aims at maximizing asset value. Section 252(3) provides appeal rights for challenging RoC orders. The Appellate Tribunal found no errors in the Adjudicating Authority's order and dismissed the appeal.
The NCLAT upheld the order of NCLAT dismissing an application for resolution as the Corporate Debtor's name was struck off by the RoC. The application under Section 9 was questioned whether it was for winding up or CIRP initiation. The Tribunal clarified that winding up involves company dissolution and asset liquidation for creditor payment, while CIRP aims at company revival. The Code is not a debt recovery mechanism but a revival tool. CIRP safeguards the Corporate Debtor's interests and aims at maximizing asset value. Section 252(3) provides appeal rights for challenging RoC orders. The Appellate Tribunal found no errors in the Adjudicating Authority's order and dismissed the appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4786
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
