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...
A writ petition challenging a statutory corporation's demand for...
Transfer fee demand on leasehold land transfer by statutory corporation challenged; petition dismissed for fact suppression and inapplicable IBC Section 31.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
A writ petition challenging a statutory corporation's demand for transfer fee on leasehold land was held non-maintainable because the petitioner invoked Article 226 by wilful suppression and misrepresentation of material facts, including selectively quoting the insolvency appellate order to portray recorded submissions as judicial observations; on this ground alone, discretionary relief was denied and the petition failed. On merits, the court found the transaction involved transfer of leasehold interest (not merely a change in shareholding), making precedents inapplicable, and rejected the "clean slate" plea under Section 31 IBC because the approved resolution plan did not extinguish the transfer-fee claim and the insolvency fora had expressly left it open to be pursued before the competent authority; the challenge was dismissed. - HC
A writ petition challenging a statutory corporation's demand for transfer fee on leasehold land was held non-maintainable because the petitioner invoked Article 226 by wilful suppression and misrepresentation of material facts, including selectively quoting the insolvency appellate order to portray recorded submissions as judicial observations; on this ground alone, discretionary relief was denied and the petition failed. On merits, the court found the transaction involved transfer of leasehold interest (not merely a change in shareholding), making precedents inapplicable, and rejected the "clean slate" plea under Section 31 IBC because the approved resolution plan did not extinguish the transfer-fee claim and the insolvency fora had expressly left it open to be pursued before the competent authority; the challenge was dismissed. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.