Classification of imported salvaged shaft pieces as ship parts confirmed, reassessment time-barred and appeal allowed restoring original classificatio...
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...
Page of 4821
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
7081 to 7100 of 96408 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
An operational creditor's Section 9 application was rejected on the ground of a pre-existing dispute. Applying Mobilox, the tribunal held that where the corporate debtor has raised a plausible dispute supported by contemporaneous material, the insolvency process cannot be triggered. Here, the claim was repudiated in writing prior to the demand notice and again in the reply to the demand notice, constituting a "notice of dispute" under Section 9(5)(ii)(d), and the defence was not moonshine. Further, alleged salary defaults falling within the Section 10A period could not found a Section 9 proceeding. The rejection of the Section 9 application and dismissal of the appeal were upheld - NCLAT
An operational creditor's Section 9 application was rejected on the ground of a pre-existing dispute. Applying Mobilox, the tribunal held that where the corporate debtor has raised a plausible dispute supported by contemporaneous material, the insolvency process cannot be triggered. Here, the claim was repudiated in writing prior to the demand notice and again in the reply to the demand notice, constituting a "notice of dispute" under Section 9(5)(ii)(d), and the defence was not moonshine. Further, alleged salary defaults falling within the Section 10A period could not found a Section 9 proceeding. The rejection of the Section 9 application and dismissal of the appeal were upheld - NCLAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.