Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
Objective characteristics govern magnesium bis-glycinate chelate classification as an amino-acid coordination compound, not a food preparation or anti...
Independent professional certification requires pleaded knowledge or complicity for criminal liability; untimely complaints remain barred by limitatio...
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.