Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
HC ruled that principles of res judicata apply to subsequent applications u/s 466 of Companies Act, 1956. The Court dissolved the stay on winding-up proceedings, emphasizing that mere settlement with creditors or workers is insufficient grounds for staying liquidation. The discretionary power u/s 466(1) requires proof satisfying the Court that proceedings ought to be stayed. The Court must consider commercial morality beyond creditors' wishes. The jurisdiction to stay proceedings can only be exercised to revive the company or its business, not to facilitate acquisition of assets at undervalued prices. The appeal was allowed, setting aside previous orders for failing to properly apply Section 466 principles and consider vital evidence.
HC ruled that principles of res judicata apply to subsequent applications u/s 466 of Companies Act, 1956. The Court dissolved the stay on winding-up proceedings, emphasizing that mere settlement with creditors or workers is insufficient grounds for staying liquidation. The discretionary power u/s 466(1) requires proof satisfying the Court that proceedings ought to be stayed. The Court must consider commercial morality beyond creditors' wishes. The jurisdiction to stay proceedings can only be exercised to revive the company or its business, not to facilitate acquisition of assets at undervalued prices. The appeal was allowed, setting aside previous orders for failing to properly apply Section 466 principles and consider vital evidence.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
