Proceeds of crime and money laundering: PMLA prosecution requires subsisting predicate offence; discharge of predicate accused precludes further prose...
Validity of faceless assessment procedure challenged for jurisdictional AO intervention mid-remand, resulting in quashing of assessment for procedural...
The Tribunal held that homebuyers as a class of creditors met the quantitative threshold for initiating a Section 7 application because the corporate debtor's developed-share entitlement produced sufficient allotted units; therefore the Section 7 petition should not have been dismissed on threshold grounds. The Tribunal treated the development agreement allocation (18% share) and actual units sold by the corporate debtor as relevant to eligibility at filing, and concluded the threshold is assessed at filing rather than later-consequence: remand to the Adjudicating Authority. The Tribunal also noted maintainability of proceedings against related landowner/developer parties forming the same project and recorded ex parte conduct by the corporate debtor, without deciding merits.
The Tribunal held that homebuyers as a class of creditors met the quantitative threshold for initiating a Section 7 application because the corporate debtor's developed-share entitlement produced sufficient allotted units; therefore the Section 7 petition should not have been dismissed on threshold grounds. The Tribunal treated the development agreement allocation (18% share) and actual units sold by the corporate debtor as relevant to eligibility at filing, and concluded the threshold is assessed at filing rather than later-consequence: remand to the Adjudicating Authority. The Tribunal also noted maintainability of proceedings against related landowner/developer parties forming the same project and recorded ex parte conduct by the corporate debtor, without deciding merits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4811 
Join Channel 
