Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
A Section 9 IBC application by an operational creditor is liable to be rejected where the information utility record reflects a dispute, since Section 9 is a summary remedy for undisputed operational debt and Section 9(5)(ii)(d) mandates rejection upon existence of dispute. As the operational creditor itself produced the information utility certificate showing a recorded dispute, the adjudicating authority erred in admitting the application without addressing that statutory bar; the admission order was set aside and the Section 9 application rejected. Independently, a pre-existing dispute was evident from the corporate debtor's reply to the demand notice disputing liability, attracting Section 9(5)(ii)(d); the appeal was allowed. - NCLAT
A Section 9 IBC application by an operational creditor is liable to be rejected where the information utility record reflects a dispute, since Section 9 is a summary remedy for undisputed operational debt and Section 9(5)(ii)(d) mandates rejection upon existence of dispute. As the operational creditor itself produced the information utility certificate showing a recorded dispute, the adjudicating authority erred in admitting the application without addressing that statutory bar; the admission order was set aside and the Section 9 application rejected. Independently, a pre-existing dispute was evident from the corporate debtor's reply to the demand notice disputing liability, attracting Section 9(5)(ii)(d); the appeal was allowed. - NCLAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
