Inventory write-off and fraudulent/wrongful trading allegations in corporate insolvency led to director liability principles applied and appeal dismis...
Condonation of delay in filing GSTR-3B returns and entitlement to Section 62 benefit results in withdrawal of assessments and revocation of attachment...
Impleadment under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC was considered: applicant failed to show that the lis cannot be effectively decided in his absence, and submitted grounds lacked supporting documents or a distinct legally protectable interest directly affected by the narrow issue (alleged non-consideration of Section 65 in admission). The Resolution Professional had appeared, filed a response and is competent to represent the corporate debtor and obtain information from the suspended director under the insolvency code; consequently impleadment was rejected and the appeal will proceed without the applicant.
Impleadment under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC was considered: applicant failed to show that the lis cannot be effectively decided in his absence, and submitted grounds lacked supporting documents or a distinct legally protectable interest directly affected by the narrow issue (alleged non-consideration of Section 65 in admission). The Resolution Professional had appeared, filed a response and is competent to represent the corporate debtor and obtain information from the suspended director under the insolvency code; consequently impleadment was rejected and the appeal will proceed without the applicant.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4814 
Join Channel 
