Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
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.