Assessment time-barred u/s 153 due to missing competent-authority reference for Singapore exchange of information; assessment disallowed as barred by ...
Imported menthol-scented sweet supari classification dispute: seizure quashed, release for home consumption subject to duty bond; bank guarantee refus...
CKD/SKD air-conditioner components classifiable with finished units by essential character; prior advance ruling extended three years, FTA benefits po...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
7221 to 7240 of 96333 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
