Search and seizure: abatement of earlier search bars use of prior seized material in later search-based assessments; relief limited to new documents f...
Admission of additional evidence under remand rules must await a meaningful remand report; failure to do so breaches natural justice and mandates rema...
Export Obligation Discharge Certificates for EPCG compliance cannot be questioned by Customs unless DGFT adjudicates and cancels them, so demands quas...
The dominant issue was whether 20.08.2024 to 28.05.2025 should be excluded from the CIRP timeline as a period during which the process could not effectively progress due to directions of the Adjudicating Authority. The tribunal held that CoC decision-making was restrained pending claim verification, and even where voting was permitted, implementation required prior leave, materially impeding CIRP progress; further, disputes and changes regarding the resolution professional also disrupted the process. Consequently, the impugned order was modified to grant exclusion of this 281-day period, while affirming the exclusion already granted for the other period; the appeal was disposed of. - NCLAT
The dominant issue was whether 20.08.2024 to 28.05.2025 should be excluded from the CIRP timeline as a period during which the process could not effectively progress due to directions of the Adjudicating Authority. The tribunal held that CoC decision-making was restrained pending claim verification, and even where voting was permitted, implementation required prior leave, materially impeding CIRP progress; further, disputes and changes regarding the resolution professional also disrupted the process. Consequently, the impugned order was modified to grant exclusion of this 281-day period, while affirming the exclusion already granted for the other period; the appeal was disposed of. - NCLAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
