Necessary-party requirements limit impleadment of independent entities, while deferred consideration does not create an appealable adverse determinati...
Food supplement classification requires common parlance and authoritative tests, preventing treatment as proprietary Ayurvedic medicines without suppo...
Specified regulatory authority income receives conditional tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income character, and return f...
Tax exemption for regulatory authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-filing...
Input tax credit conditions remain constitutionally valid, with eligible recipient claims considered under GST circulars and retrospective filing dead...
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 
of 4788
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
