Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
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 
TaxTMI 
of 4807 
Join Channel 
