Blocked input tax credit for resort construction remains unavailable; interest follows actual utilisation, while delayed payment attracts statutory pe...
Duplicate PAN allocation requires record verification and deactivation reasons before assessment-related transactions can be attributed to an assessee...
Faceless assessment safeguards require requested personal hearings and adequate final show-cause response time, failing which reassessment is required...
Page of 4891
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
201 to 220 of 97820 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Corporate debtor filed a reply to the financial creditor's Section 7 application in December 2023, but moved an application u/s 8 for reference to arbitration only on March 7, 2024. The financial creditor had initiated arbitration proceedings by unilaterally appointing an arbitrator in July 2019, but the arbitrator terminated the proceedings in October 2021, holding the appointment contrary to law. The NCLAT held that if an application u/s 8 is filed, the adjudicating authority must first decide the Section 7 application by recording satisfaction regarding default. The pendency or initiation of arbitration proceedings after filing the Section 7 application is immaterial. Allowing the Section 8 application would defeat the IBC's purpose by asking the adjudicating authority to await arbitration proceedings. The corporate debtor admitted debt and default in one-time settlement offers in 2019 and 2022. The adjudicating authority rightly rejected the Section 8 application, and the NCLAT dismissed the appeal.
Corporate debtor filed a reply to the financial creditor's Section 7 application in December 2023, but moved an application u/s 8 for reference to arbitration only on March 7, 2024. The financial creditor had initiated arbitration proceedings by unilaterally appointing an arbitrator in July 2019, but the arbitrator terminated the proceedings in October 2021, holding the appointment contrary to law. The NCLAT held that if an application u/s 8 is filed, the adjudicating authority must first decide the Section 7 application by recording satisfaction regarding default. The pendency or initiation of arbitration proceedings after filing the Section 7 application is immaterial. Allowing the Section 8 application would defeat the IBC's purpose by asking the adjudicating authority to await arbitration proceedings. The corporate debtor admitted debt and default in one-time settlement offers in 2019 and 2022. The adjudicating authority rightly rejected the Section 8 application, and the NCLAT dismissed the appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4891 
