Permanent Establishment and Business Connection: foreign consultancy receipts not attributable where no fixed base or corporate veil piercing establis...
Limitation period commencement and procedural inquiry rules: identity-based limitation upheld; complaints by authorised public servants need not attra...
Page of 4821
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
5921 to 5940 of 96406 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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.