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...
Page of 4798
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
341 to 360 of 95957 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
IBBI suspended the registration of the Petitioner for two years due to various allegations. The High Court found that the Petitioner did not violate any regulations by imposing a non-refundable participation fee on bidders before a specific regulation was in force. Regarding the appointment of unregistered valuers, the Court noted that the valuers involved were registered individually, and their work was accepted without issue. However, the Court upheld the charge of appointing a support service, BRAL, in which the Petitioner was a partner, to increase fees, which contravened Liquidation Regulations. The Court modified the suspension to the period already served, acknowledging 20 months of suspension already undergone. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
IBBI suspended the registration of the Petitioner for two years due to various allegations. The High Court found that the Petitioner did not violate any regulations by imposing a non-refundable participation fee on bidders before a specific regulation was in force. Regarding the appointment of unregistered valuers, the Court noted that the valuers involved were registered individually, and their work was accepted without issue. However, the Court upheld the charge of appointing a support service, BRAL, in which the Petitioner was a partner, to increase fees, which contravened Liquidation Regulations. The Court modified the suspension to the period already served, acknowledging 20 months of suspension already undergone. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
