Scope of intermediary status for data hosting services: tribunal finds provider not intermediary, services exported and not taxable, limited remand on...
CENVAT credit availability after omission of Rule 12B in textiles confirmed; late addendum to SCN introducing new grounds held time-barred and invalid...
Export of Wheat Flour and related products subject to online allocation, eligibility criteria, non-transferable six-month authorisations and reporting...
Straight-line lease rental accounting change results in penalty quashed where disclosed accounts and bona fide arguable accounting interpretation exis...
Page of 4823
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
7141 to 7160 of 96456 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Whether SARFAESI measures could be invoked against a borrower in Nagaland and in the absence of any mortgage/security interest was determined by holding that the Act's overriding clause in s.35 cannot prevail over the special constitutional protection under Art. 371A, and that SARFAESI enforcement presupposes creation of a security interest, which was undisputedly absent. Given the loan agreement pre-dated SARFAESI's commencement, invocation required heightened scrutiny, and the creditor's action was held without jurisdiction; consequently, the borrower could not be relegated to the DRT remedy under s.17. The writ interference was upheld and the appeal was dismissed - SC
Whether SARFAESI measures could be invoked against a borrower in Nagaland and in the absence of any mortgage/security interest was determined by holding that the Act's overriding clause in s.35 cannot prevail over the special constitutional protection under Art. 371A, and that SARFAESI enforcement presupposes creation of a security interest, which was undisputedly absent. Given the loan agreement pre-dated SARFAESI's commencement, invocation required heightened scrutiny, and the creditor's action was held without jurisdiction; consequently, the borrower could not be relegated to the DRT remedy under s.17. The writ interference was upheld and the appeal was dismissed - SC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.