Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
The appellant, a decree holder, qualifies as a "Financial Creditor" under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). The settlement agreement recognized the appellant's financial claim, and the decree formalized the respondent's obligation to pay, not altering the underlying financial debt's character. The petition filed by the appellant u/s 7 of the IBC is within the limitation period. The respondent's acknowledgments of debt before the High Court extended the limitation period u/s 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The NCLT order dismissing the petition on the ground of limitation is erroneous and liable to be set aside. The appeal is allowed.
The appellant, a decree holder, qualifies as a "Financial Creditor" under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). The settlement agreement recognized the appellant's financial claim, and the decree formalized the respondent's obligation to pay, not altering the underlying financial debt's character. The petition filed by the appellant u/s 7 of the IBC is within the limitation period. The respondent's acknowledgments of debt before the High Court extended the limitation period u/s 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The NCLT order dismissing the petition on the ground of limitation is erroneous and liable to be set aside. The appeal is allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4794
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
