Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Page of 4798
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
301 to 320 of 95955 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The High Court held that the order passed by NCLT approving the Resolution Plan u/s 31(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 is an appealable order u/s 61, with a limitation period of 30 days + 15 days to file an appeal before NCLAT. As the respondents failed to challenge the NCLT order within the prescribed time, they cannot take a stand contrary to the approved Resolution Plan. Consequently, the writ petition was allowed.
The High Court held that the order passed by NCLT approving the Resolution Plan u/s 31(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 is an appealable order u/s 61, with a limitation period of 30 days + 15 days to file an appeal before NCLAT. As the respondents failed to challenge the NCLT order within the prescribed time, they cannot take a stand contrary to the approved Resolution Plan. Consequently, the writ petition was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
