Constitutional personal-liberty safeguards limit PMLA twin bail conditions where completed investigations lead to prolonged incarceration before trial...
Automated airline software subscriptions without human intervention fail technical-services characterisation and do not make available underlying tech...
Business support recruitment and training receipts qualify for presumptive business taxation, not professional taxation under technical consultancy ru...
Treaty exemption for foreign permanent-establishment management fees prevailed, while dividend expense disallowance remained limited to an accepted al...
Centralised assessment transfers: participation after requesting centralisation can bar technical jurisdictional challenges, while assessment disputes...
Binding precedent remains operative despite pending challenge, supporting deletion of interest disallowance when debt is converted into preference sha...
Page of 4918
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
241 to 260 of 98359 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NCLAT permitted correction of the nomenclature of the pending application from "Review" to "Recall," noting that the body already treated it as a recall application, and found no necessity to restrain NCLT from proceeding with the creditor's Section 7 IBC application. On the substantive prayer to recall and set aside NCLAT's earlier order (and thereby restore NCLT's dismissal of the Section 7 application), NCLAT held that the applicant was impermissibly seeking a re-appreciation of its judgment in the guise of recall, particularly after having approached the SC and not pressing the appeal. The recall application was dismissed.
NCLAT permitted correction of the nomenclature of the pending application from "Review" to "Recall," noting that the body already treated it as a recall application, and found no necessity to restrain NCLT from proceeding with the creditor's Section 7 IBC application. On the substantive prayer to recall and set aside NCLAT's earlier order (and thereby restore NCLT's dismissal of the Section 7 application), NCLAT held that the applicant was impermissibly seeking a re-appreciation of its judgment in the guise of recall, particularly after having approached the SC and not pressing the appeal. The recall application was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4918 
