Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
Rule 22 of CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 governs abatement of appeals in case of liquidation proceedings. The appellant company faced recovery of irregular CENVAT credit availed, along with interest and penalty. NCLT Chennai ordered liquidation of the appellant vide order dated 19.03.2018. The Deputy Commissioner of GST and Central Excise, Trichy registered its claim with the Liquidator. As the Official Liquidator did not apply for continuance of the appeal u/r 22, the appeal abated. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as infructuous due to the liquidation proceedings and non-application by the Liquidator for continuance.
Rule 22 of CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 governs abatement of appeals in case of liquidation proceedings. The appellant company faced recovery of irregular CENVAT credit availed, along with interest and penalty. NCLT Chennai ordered liquidation of the appellant vide order dated 19.03.2018. The Deputy Commissioner of GST and Central Excise, Trichy registered its claim with the Liquidator. As the Official Liquidator did not apply for continuance of the appeal u/r 22, the appeal abated. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as infructuous due to the liquidation proceedings and non-application by the Liquidator for continuance.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.