Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
The HC dismissed a petition challenging NCLT's jurisdiction to entertain an application under Section 95 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Petitioner contended that NCLT's initiation of proceedings violated IB Code provisions. The HC relied on Supreme Court precedent in Dilip B Jiwrajka v Union of India, which upheld constitutional validity of Sections 95-100 and rejected arguments requiring parties to be heard before Resolution Professional appointment. The Court held that Resolution Professional's enquiry is merely facilitative to collate facts, with the report being recommendatory. Guarantors receive adequate hearing opportunity at adjudication stage under Section 99(10) after receiving the report, ensuring no natural justice violation. The HC found petitioners had challenged application maintainability before NCLT, making tribunal consideration appropriate, with effective remedies available against adverse decisions.
The HC dismissed a petition challenging NCLT's jurisdiction to entertain an application under Section 95 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Petitioner contended that NCLT's initiation of proceedings violated IB Code provisions. The HC relied on Supreme Court precedent in Dilip B Jiwrajka v Union of India, which upheld constitutional validity of Sections 95-100 and rejected arguments requiring parties to be heard before Resolution Professional appointment. The Court held that Resolution Professional's enquiry is merely facilitative to collate facts, with the report being recommendatory. Guarantors receive adequate hearing opportunity at adjudication stage under Section 99(10) after receiving the report, ensuring no natural justice violation. The HC found petitioners had challenged application maintainability before NCLT, making tribunal consideration appropriate, with effective remedies available against adverse decisions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
