Form 26AS evidence requires successor-entity accounting verification after business transfer, while invoice-supported related-party advertising expend...
Money-laundering judgment timing requires awaiting the scheduled-offence decision despite continuation of the underlying trial where outcomes directly...
Accredited investor eligibility expands through securities-market exposure, while alternative investment fund disputes require prescribed resolution a...
Customs Assessment Portal centralises classification and valuation guidance to support consistent, transparent and informed compliance across stakehol...
Page of 4918
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
101 to 120 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" ?
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.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4918 
