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...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, addressed the modification of a Demerger Scheme's terms by changing the Appointed Date to the date of the Impugned Order's pronouncement. The Tribunal held that if statutory provisions are complied with and there is no violation of law or public policy, the NCLT lacks jurisdiction to question the commercial wisdom of those approving the scheme. Altering the Appointed Date could have significant financial implications, and the Tribunal's role is supervisory if all sanctioning parameters are met. The reliance on a previous case was deemed incorrect as the Appointed Date should align with the scheme's provisions. The appeal was allowed, confirming the Appointed Date as per the scheme and not the date of the NCLT's pronouncement.
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, addressed the modification of a Demerger Scheme's terms by changing the Appointed Date to the date of the Impugned Order's pronouncement. The Tribunal held that if statutory provisions are complied with and there is no violation of law or public policy, the NCLT lacks jurisdiction to question the commercial wisdom of those approving the scheme. Altering the Appointed Date could have significant financial implications, and the Tribunal's role is supervisory if all sanctioning parameters are met. The reliance on a previous case was deemed incorrect as the Appointed Date should align with the scheme's provisions. The appeal was allowed, confirming the Appointed Date as per the scheme and not the date of the NCLT's pronouncement.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
