Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
Page of 4786
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
461 to 480 of 95715 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Insolvency and BankruptcyJune 22, 2024Case LawsTri
The Tribunal addressed the maintainability of an application for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) by an Operational Creditor (OC) against a Corporate Debtor (CD). The OC claimed default in payment by the CD but failed to provide invoices as evidence. Despite a demand notice under Section 8 of the IBC and a bank statement showing a partial payment, the Tribunal found the application time-barred as it was filed beyond the three-year limitation period from the alleged default date. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of proving debt and default before initiating CIRP, ultimately rejecting the application under Section 9 of the IBC.
The Tribunal addressed the maintainability of an application for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) by an Operational Creditor (OC) against a Corporate Debtor (CD). The OC claimed default in payment by the CD but failed to provide invoices as evidence. Despite a demand notice under Section 8 of the IBC and a bank statement showing a partial payment, the Tribunal found the application time-barred as it was filed beyond the three-year limitation period from the alleged default date. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of proving debt and default before initiating CIRP, ultimately rejecting the application under Section 9 of the IBC.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.