Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
The account of the borrower was classified as a Non-Performing Asset (NPA) on the relevant date. The transfer of the financial asset by the State Bank of India (SBI) to the Asset Reconstruction Company (ARC) is valid. The High Court's impugned judgment and order dated October 5, 2023 is set aside, and the appeal is allowed. The date on which the account should be considered as NPA for a sale u/s 5 of the Act of 2002 would be the date of publication of the web notice, not the date of NPA mentioned in the notice u/s 13(2). SBI's action in putting up the financial assets for sale and ultimately assigning them to the ARC cannot be faulted, as it did not violate any binding Reserve Bank of India (RBI) Directions. The borrower, who did not respond to the notice u/s 13(2), failed to discharge the burden of proof rebutting the presumption that the account became NPA on the date of the web notice.
The account of the borrower was classified as a Non-Performing Asset (NPA) on the relevant date. The transfer of the financial asset by the State Bank of India (SBI) to the Asset Reconstruction Company (ARC) is valid. The High Court's impugned judgment and order dated October 5, 2023 is set aside, and the appeal is allowed. The date on which the account should be considered as NPA for a sale u/s 5 of the Act of 2002 would be the date of publication of the web notice, not the date of NPA mentioned in the notice u/s 13(2). SBI's action in putting up the financial assets for sale and ultimately assigning them to the ARC cannot be faulted, as it did not violate any binding Reserve Bank of India (RBI) Directions. The borrower, who did not respond to the notice u/s 13(2), failed to discharge the burden of proof rebutting the presumption that the account became NPA on the date of the web notice.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
