Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
Mutual fund maturity rules require proper rollover, redemption, disclosure, and due diligence; investor gains cannot excuse regulatory breaches or pen...
Page of 4798
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1161 to 1180 of 95957 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NCLAT upheld the NCLT's refusal to admit a fresh Section 7 application filed by a financial creditor (a banking institution) against the corporate debtor, noting that CIRP had already commenced and was ongoing pursuant to earlier orders, including project-wise CIRP directions for the real estate entity. The Appellate Tribunal found no legal infirmity or jurisdictional error warranting interference with the impugned order. However, it clarified that the applicant may pursue reliefs sought in the pending interlocutory application. NCLAT further recorded that, consistent with the amended CIRP Regulations, the Resolution Professional is at liberty to continue project-wise resolution for the unfinished project in which the applicant claims financial creditor status, including issuance of Information Memorandum and Form G.
NCLAT upheld the NCLT's refusal to admit a fresh Section 7 application filed by a financial creditor (a banking institution) against the corporate debtor, noting that CIRP had already commenced and was ongoing pursuant to earlier orders, including project-wise CIRP directions for the real estate entity. The Appellate Tribunal found no legal infirmity or jurisdictional error warranting interference with the impugned order. However, it clarified that the applicant may pursue reliefs sought in the pending interlocutory application. NCLAT further recorded that, consistent with the amended CIRP Regulations, the Resolution Professional is at liberty to continue project-wise resolution for the unfinished project in which the applicant claims financial creditor status, including issuance of Information Memorandum and Form G.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
