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...
The NCLAT set aside the order and allowed the appeal, ruling that outstanding lease rental and premium due during the CIRP period cannot be included in CIRP costs. It relied on its previous decision in Sunil Kumar Agrawal case, which held that the explanation u/s 14(1)(d) of IBC is not applicable to premium amount or lease rent as they are not covered under licenses, permits, registrations, quotas, concessions, or clearances mentioned in that section. The NCLAT maintained the same order as in Sunil Kumar Agrawal case, despite NOIDA challenging it in the Supreme Court through a civil appeal where notice has been issued but no stay granted. The NCLAT will follow its previous order until the Supreme Court decides on its correctness in the pending civil appeal.
The NCLAT set aside the order and allowed the appeal, ruling that outstanding lease rental and premium due during the CIRP period cannot be included in CIRP costs. It relied on its previous decision in Sunil Kumar Agrawal case, which held that the explanation u/s 14(1)(d) of IBC is not applicable to premium amount or lease rent as they are not covered under licenses, permits, registrations, quotas, concessions, or clearances mentioned in that section. The NCLAT maintained the same order as in Sunil Kumar Agrawal case, despite NOIDA challenging it in the Supreme Court through a civil appeal where notice has been issued but no stay granted. The NCLAT will follow its previous order until the Supreme Court decides on its correctness in the pending civil appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.