Tariff classification determines GST schedule and rate; beverages in Schedule III attract the higher rate, tea extracts and syrups in Schedule I attra...
Fraudulent trading requires cogent evidence of intent to defraud; ordinary-course payments protected, except post-insolvency withdrawals must be resto...
Religious purpose exclusion versus charitable purpose: non overriding religious objects do not attract Explanation 3, registration directed under sect...
Whether an arbitral tribunal had jurisdiction to adjudicate a claim after approval of a resolution plan: tribunal found the claim was disclosed as a contingent operational debt in the resolution plan, the CoC and Adjudicating Authority approved the plan under Section 31(1) IBC, and precedent (Electrosteel) holds such approval extinguishes liabilities rendering the tribunal without jurisdiction-impugned arbitral order set aside and proceedings terminated. Whether high court could entertain interference under Articles 226/227: court may interfere only if the arbitral order is perverse or lacks inherent jurisdiction; here that jurisdiction was absent, so petition is allowed. - HC
Whether an arbitral tribunal had jurisdiction to adjudicate a claim after approval of a resolution plan: tribunal found the claim was disclosed as a contingent operational debt in the resolution plan, the CoC and Adjudicating Authority approved the plan under Section 31(1) IBC, and precedent (Electrosteel) holds such approval extinguishes liabilities rendering the tribunal without jurisdiction-impugned arbitral order set aside and proceedings terminated. Whether high court could entertain interference under Articles 226/227: court may interfere only if the arbitral order is perverse or lacks inherent jurisdiction; here that jurisdiction was absent, so petition is allowed. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4821 
Join Channel 
