Retrospective application of beneficial circulars upheld, binding officers and granting post adjudication relief where adjudication occurred after cir...
Admissibility of Investigation Statements requires witness examination before the adjudicating authority; otherwise statements cannot sustain a penalt...
Transaction value and connected person treatment in excise valuation: proprietary concerns not inter connected undertakings, relief on valuation and c...
Appointment of Registrars as adjudicating officers under Companies Act reallocates territorial jurisdiction and sets appeal route to Regional Director...
The Adjudicating Authority retained jurisdiction to decide the pending application for recovery of corporate debtor's assets even after approval of the resolution plan, since the application had been filed and contested prior to plan approval and was validly continued by substitution of the successful resolution applicant/corporate debtor; the jurisdictional objection was rejected. The Authority also had jurisdiction under Section 60(5) IBC to examine the MoU and related rights; the unregistered MoU, premised on disputed cash payments and surrounded by credibility concerns, was not an agreement to sell and could not confer protection under Section 53A TPA, rendering the appellant an unauthorised occupant; eviction and handover were upheld. Usage charges were sustained, payable upon proper determination. - NCLAT
The Adjudicating Authority retained jurisdiction to decide the pending application for recovery of corporate debtor's assets even after approval of the resolution plan, since the application had been filed and contested prior to plan approval and was validly continued by substitution of the successful resolution applicant/corporate debtor; the jurisdictional objection was rejected. The Authority also had jurisdiction under Section 60(5) IBC to examine the MoU and related rights; the unregistered MoU, premised on disputed cash payments and surrounded by credibility concerns, was not an agreement to sell and could not confer protection under Section 53A TPA, rendering the appellant an unauthorised occupant; eviction and handover were upheld. Usage charges were sustained, payable upon proper determination. - NCLAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.