Transfer-pricing aggregation of distinct support-service and subcontract transactions was rejected, while debt-free receivables attracted no notional ...
Customs exemptions cover photovoltaic assembly machinery and PVF backsheets, while fully declared cleared imports may avoid confiscation and penalties...
Specific tariff classification for LCD devices overrides treatment as electricity-meter parts, defeating differential duty, extended limitation, and p...
Stayed disciplinary punishment does not establish unfitness for insolvency professional registration; reconsideration must disregard mere pendency of ...
Indirect corporate control can create related-party status, excluding financial creditors from Committee of Creditors representation, participation an...
Scientific research association approval requires continuing SIRO status, annual donation reporting, and donor certificates for the approved foundatio...
Scientific research institution approval is conditional on SIRO recognition, annual donation reporting, donor certification, and prescribed compliance...
Page of 4878
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
41 to 60 of 97553 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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 
TaxTMI 
of 4878 
