Authentication of paper assessment orders upheld, while qualifying repairs, consumables and vendor advance write-offs remain deductible business claim...
Transaction value cannot be rejected solely on non-statutory valuation guidelines without corroborative evidence supporting reassessment of final cust...
Page of 4798
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
621 to 640 of 95957 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 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
