PMLA anticipatory bail requires satisfaction of twin conditions, while predicate-offence protection does not extend to independent money-laundering pr...
School-affiliation charges remain taxable where not directly connected with examinations, while extended limitation requires proof of deliberate tax e...
Concessional penalty for search-disclosed unreconciled jewellery applies where substantive disclosure conditions are met despite omission from origina...
Page of 4826
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1 to 20 of 96510 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The appeal is dismissed. NCLAT upheld the adjudicating...
Appeal dismissed; merger validity not reopened, leasehold rights transferred to corporate debtor formed liquidation estate; section 36(4)(a)(iv) inapplicable
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
The appeal is dismissed. NCLAT upheld the adjudicating authority's refusal to revisit the validity of the amalgamation/merger scheme, finding the appellant had impliedly acquiesced and failed to challenge the merger earlier; the moratorium precluded unilateral termination of the lease. The Tribunal held that only leasehold rights (intangible assets) were transferred to the corporate debtor (CD) and thence to the transferee, and such leasehold rights formed part of the liquidation estate. The liquidator lawfully took custody and included those leasehold rights in the liquidation estate; the bar in section 36(4)(a)(iv) was inapplicable on these facts. The IA challenging inclusion was properly dismissed.
The appeal is dismissed. NCLAT upheld the adjudicating authority's refusal to revisit the validity of the amalgamation/merger scheme, finding the appellant had impliedly acquiesced and failed to challenge the merger earlier; the moratorium precluded unilateral termination of the lease. The Tribunal held that only leasehold rights (intangible assets) were transferred to the corporate debtor (CD) and thence to the transferee, and such leasehold rights formed part of the liquidation estate. The liquidator lawfully took custody and included those leasehold rights in the liquidation estate; the bar in section 36(4)(a)(iv) was inapplicable on these facts. The IA challenging inclusion was properly dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.