Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, addressed the admissibility of a second petition u/s 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, concerning unpaid instalments and the existence of debt and default. The Corporate Debtor availed a loan from the Financial Creditor but failed to make payments, leading to the first petition being admitted. A settlement was reached, but the Corporate Debtor failed to honor it, resulting in the Financial Creditor filing a second petition for the remaining debt. The Adjudicating Authority rightly admitted the second petition, emphasizing that allowing such tactics by the Corporate Debtor would be detrimental. The Tribunal held that the amount paid during the appeal should be adjusted only if supported by a written agreement; otherwise, the Financial Creditor could adjust it towards interest. The appeal was dismissed, and the deposited amount was ordered to be returned to the Appellant.
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, addressed the admissibility of a second petition u/s 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, concerning unpaid instalments and the existence of debt and default. The Corporate Debtor availed a loan from the Financial Creditor but failed to make payments, leading to the first petition being admitted. A settlement was reached, but the Corporate Debtor failed to honor it, resulting in the Financial Creditor filing a second petition for the remaining debt. The Adjudicating Authority rightly admitted the second petition, emphasizing that allowing such tactics by the Corporate Debtor would be detrimental. The Tribunal held that the amount paid during the appeal should be adjusted only if supported by a written agreement; otherwise, the Financial Creditor could adjust it towards interest. The appeal was dismissed, and the deposited amount was ordered to be returned to the Appellant.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4784
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
