Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
Page of 4790
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
141 to 160 of 95794 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NCLAT rejected contempt proceedings against resolution professional (RP) for filing Section 12A withdrawal application. The Tribunal determined that RP's application for CIRP withdrawal, approved by 98% Committee of Creditors (CoC) vote share, did not constitute willful disobedience of prior tribunal order. The RP was statutorily obligated to file withdrawal application, and since CoC did not approve fee payments to former or current RP, no contempt could be established. The tribunal found no merit in the contempt application, emphasizing that statutory compliance cannot be construed as contumacious conduct, thereby dismissing the application and protecting the RP's procedural actions under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.
NCLAT rejected contempt proceedings against resolution professional (RP) for filing Section 12A withdrawal application. The Tribunal determined that RP's application for CIRP withdrawal, approved by 98% Committee of Creditors (CoC) vote share, did not constitute willful disobedience of prior tribunal order. The RP was statutorily obligated to file withdrawal application, and since CoC did not approve fee payments to former or current RP, no contempt could be established. The tribunal found no merit in the contempt application, emphasizing that statutory compliance cannot be construed as contumacious conduct, thereby dismissing the application and protecting the RP's procedural actions under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4790
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
