Tax appeal allowed: AO exceeded s.144C DRP mandate by introducing new findings and recharacterising non-resident receipts as permanent establishment i...
Anonymized petitioner gets partial relief: bank guarantee quashed, PVC-coated fabric released under reduced conditions while valuation proceedings con...
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.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
