Credit-note turnover adjustments preserve inverted-duty refunds, while ministerial re-computation does not constitute an impermissible appellate reman...
Revisional jurisdiction over export quota premium deductions requires both error and Revenue prejudice; a permissible assessment view cannot be displa...
The appeal challenges the admission of an unstamped Assignment Agreement dated 29.03.2022 under the Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958. The court held that the Assignment Agreement is a registered document, and by virtue of Section 5(2) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, the assignee, Phoenix Arc Pvt. Ltd., is entitled to prosecute and enforce all pending applications, appeals, and legal proceedings, including the Section 7 application filed by L&T Finance Ltd. The deeming clause in Section 5(2) protects and entitles Phoenix Arc Pvt. Ltd. to prosecute the Section 7 application. The Adjudicating Authority did not err in rejecting the Corporate Debtor's application to impound the document and allowing Phoenix Arc Pvt. Ltd. to prosecute the applications. The appeal was dismissed by the NCLAT (Appellate Tribunal).
The appeal challenges the admission of an unstamped Assignment Agreement dated 29.03.2022 under the Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958. The court held that the Assignment Agreement is a registered document, and by virtue of Section 5(2) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, the assignee, Phoenix Arc Pvt. Ltd., is entitled to prosecute and enforce all pending applications, appeals, and legal proceedings, including the Section 7 application filed by L&T Finance Ltd. The deeming clause in Section 5(2) protects and entitles Phoenix Arc Pvt. Ltd. to prosecute the Section 7 application. The Adjudicating Authority did not err in rejecting the Corporate Debtor's application to impound the document and allowing Phoenix Arc Pvt. Ltd. to prosecute the applications. The appeal was dismissed by the NCLAT (Appellate Tribunal).
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4888 
