Opportunity to respond to jurisdictional reports is mandatory before customs settlement duty enhancement; connected applications require consistent ad...
Specific customs headings for scaffolding components prevail over general classification, invalidating misclassification proceedings and enabling with...
Liquidator appointment under Section 34 requires consideration of creditor recommendations, valid professional authorisation, and preservation of vali...
NCLAT dismissed an appeal challenging admission of Section 9 IBC application, affirming the application was within limitation period. Last payment made on 17.02.2017 extended limitation to 17.02.2020, and filing on next working day was permissible under Limitation Act. Tribunal rejected appellant's claim of improper demand notice service and pre-existing dispute. CD's contention of cash payments was unsupported by evidence beyond self-serving ledger entries. The alleged dispute emerged only post-demand notice. Application's maintainability was upheld despite OC being unregistered partnership firm, as Section 69(2) of Partnership Act restrictions don't apply to IBC proceedings. CIRP to continue against CD.
NCLAT dismissed an appeal challenging admission of Section 9 IBC application, affirming the application was within limitation period. Last payment made on 17.02.2017 extended limitation to 17.02.2020, and filing on next working day was permissible under Limitation Act. Tribunal rejected appellant's claim of improper demand notice service and pre-existing dispute. CD's contention of cash payments was unsupported by evidence beyond self-serving ledger entries. The alleged dispute emerged only post-demand notice. Application's maintainability was upheld despite OC being unregistered partnership firm, as Section 69(2) of Partnership Act restrictions don't apply to IBC proceedings. CIRP to continue against CD.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4794
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
