Benami transaction and beneficial ownership: documentary and circumstantial evidence show payors were true beneficiaries, resulting in PBPTA consequen...
Denial of Preferential Treatment under SAFTA overturned where unchallenged Country of Origin certificate warranted exemption under Notification benefi...
Continuing offence of money-laundering: discharge set aside and proceedings reinstated where laundering continued after inclusion of predicate offence...
Issue was whether amendment of a personal guarantor insolvency petition under s.95 IBC to change the date of default by adding a loan recall notice dated 05.04.2016 was permissible, despite objections on limitation and lack of proper invocation of guarantee. The tribunal held that amendment was justified since the creditor could not produce proof of service of an earlier statutory demand, and the added recall notice formed the factual basis to be tested on merits. Allowing amendment did not amount to any finding on limitation or validity of guarantee invocation, which could be urged in reply and decided by the adjudicating authority. Appeal was dismissed. - NCLAT
Issue was whether amendment of a personal guarantor insolvency petition under s.95 IBC to change the date of default by adding a loan recall notice dated 05.04.2016 was permissible, despite objections on limitation and lack of proper invocation of guarantee. The tribunal held that amendment was justified since the creditor could not produce proof of service of an earlier statutory demand, and the added recall notice formed the factual basis to be tested on merits. Allowing amendment did not amount to any finding on limitation or validity of guarantee invocation, which could be urged in reply and decided by the adjudicating authority. Appeal was dismissed. - NCLAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4824 
Join Channel 
