Form 26AS evidence requires successor-entity accounting verification after business transfer, while invoice-supported related-party advertising expend...
Money-laundering judgment timing requires awaiting the scheduled-offence decision despite continuation of the underlying trial where outcomes directly...
Accredited investor eligibility expands through securities-market exposure, while alternative investment fund disputes require prescribed resolution a...
Page of 4916
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
41 to 60 of 98302 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The NCLAT rejected the preliminary objections raised by the Corporate Debtor that the application u/s 9 filed by the Operational Creditor was barred by limitation. It held that the last payment was made on 26.08.2019, which was within three years, and there was an acknowledgment by the Corporate Debtor in writing reflected in the reply to the demand notice. As both conditions u/s 19 of the Limitation Act were fulfilled, the Operational Creditor was entitled to the benefit of extension of limitation. Consequently, the Section 9 application was well within the limitation period. The NCLAT dismissed the appeal.
The NCLAT rejected the preliminary objections raised by the Corporate Debtor that the application u/s 9 filed by the Operational Creditor was barred by limitation. It held that the last payment was made on 26.08.2019, which was within three years, and there was an acknowledgment by the Corporate Debtor in writing reflected in the reply to the demand notice. As both conditions u/s 19 of the Limitation Act were fulfilled, the Operational Creditor was entitled to the benefit of extension of limitation. Consequently, the Section 9 application was well within the limitation period. The NCLAT dismissed the appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4916 
