Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
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 4788
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
