Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
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 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
