Bona fide disclosure requirements govern under-reporting penalties, and post-penalty immunity applications cannot secure available statutory protectio...
Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1221 to 1240 of 96092 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
