Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
The writ petition challenging notices u/ss 13(2) and 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, including alleged arbitrary action for non-compliance with a letter of arrangement dated June 28, 2021, was filed after issuance of the Section 13(4) notice. The Supreme Court in Phoenix ARC held that writ petitions against proposed action u/s 13(4) are an abuse of process due to the efficacious statutory remedy of appeal u/s 17. The Supreme Court in Baghora Polylab held that a contract may be discharged by parties entering into a new contract or accepting modified obligations. Here, the respondent executed documents per the November 11, 2021 letter of arrangement, constituting a new contract substituting the original June 28, 2021 restructuring letter. Thus, the cause of action for specific performance of the June 28 letter no longer survives after accepting the November 11 letter. The High Court's direction to give effect to the June 28 letter was set aside.
The writ petition challenging notices u/ss 13(2) and 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, including alleged arbitrary action for non-compliance with a letter of arrangement dated June 28, 2021, was filed after issuance of the Section 13(4) notice. The Supreme Court in Phoenix ARC held that writ petitions against proposed action u/s 13(4) are an abuse of process due to the efficacious statutory remedy of appeal u/s 17. The Supreme Court in Baghora Polylab held that a contract may be discharged by parties entering into a new contract or accepting modified obligations. Here, the respondent executed documents per the November 11, 2021 letter of arrangement, constituting a new contract substituting the original June 28, 2021 restructuring letter. Thus, the cause of action for specific performance of the June 28 letter no longer survives after accepting the November 11 letter. The High Court's direction to give effect to the June 28 letter was set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
