Religious purpose exclusion versus charitable purpose: non overriding religious objects do not attract Explanation 3, registration directed under sect...
Search-assessment proviso jurisdiction, time-barred valuation reports, and denial of cross-examination vitiate valuation-based and confession-based ad...
Treatment of a creditors claim as contingent liability versus classification as an unsecured creditor determined whether the Adjudicating Authority must admit a Section 9 petition; the Authority is obliged to decide existence of debt, default and any pre-existing dispute, and if debt and default are proved with no dispute, admit the petition. Contingent liabilities require crystallisation before becoming due, a process not shown by the respondent, undermining its contingent classification; binding effect of a BIFR-sanctioned rehabilitation scheme on unsecured creditors does not apply where the claim remained contingent. Appeal allowed and matter restored for fresh adjudication on debt, default and dispute.
Treatment of a creditors claim as contingent liability versus classification as an unsecured creditor determined whether the Adjudicating Authority must admit a Section 9 petition; the Authority is obliged to decide existence of debt, default and any pre-existing dispute, and if debt and default are proved with no dispute, admit the petition. Contingent liabilities require crystallisation before becoming due, a process not shown by the respondent, undermining its contingent classification; binding effect of a BIFR-sanctioned rehabilitation scheme on unsecured creditors does not apply where the claim remained contingent. Appeal allowed and matter restored for fresh adjudication on debt, default and dispute.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
