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...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
Page of 4784
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
61 to 80 of 95673 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 the appeal challenging the rejection of a Section 9 insolvency application. The operational creditor's default dates (03.05.2020, 15.08.2020, and 01.01.2021) fell within the Section 10A prohibited period under IBC. Consistent with Supreme Court precedent in Ramesh Kymal, the tribunal held that defaults occurring during the specified COVID-19 period cannot form the basis for initiating corporate insolvency resolution proceedings. The tribunal emphasized that the creditor bore the responsibility to amend default dates if required, and the adjudicating authority was not obligated to modify dates sua sponte. Consequently, the Section 9 application was deemed non-maintainable, and the appeal was dismissed without merit.
NCLAT dismissed the appeal challenging the rejection of a Section 9 insolvency application. The operational creditor's default dates (03.05.2020, 15.08.2020, and 01.01.2021) fell within the Section 10A prohibited period under IBC. Consistent with Supreme Court precedent in Ramesh Kymal, the tribunal held that defaults occurring during the specified COVID-19 period cannot form the basis for initiating corporate insolvency resolution proceedings. The tribunal emphasized that the creditor bore the responsibility to amend default dates if required, and the adjudicating authority was not obligated to modify dates sua sponte. Consequently, the Section 9 application was deemed non-maintainable, and the appeal was dismissed without merit.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4784
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
