Timing mismatch in income recognition requires verification whether receipts were already taxed in an earlier year; matter remitted for fresh examinat...
FOB transaction value and export incentives: customs valuation cannot override contractual export benefits or support confiscation without valid proof...
The Adjudicating Authority had jurisdiction under section 60(5) to entertain the Resolution Professional's eviction application because the corporate debtor's ownership of the premises was undisputed and recovery of its own asset fell within the duty to take control, custody, preservation and protection of assets. The appellant failed to prove any tenancy, lease or licence; the record showed only permissive stocking of goods, with no rent, lease terms, or possessory right. The civil court's interim order did not bar eviction, as the Code excludes civil court jurisdiction where the insolvency forum is competent. The appeal was dismissed and possession was directed to be handed over to the Resolution Professional.
The Adjudicating Authority had jurisdiction under section 60(5) to entertain the Resolution Professional's eviction application because the corporate debtor's ownership of the premises was undisputed and recovery of its own asset fell within the duty to take control, custody, preservation and protection of assets. The appellant failed to prove any tenancy, lease or licence; the record showed only permissive stocking of goods, with no rent, lease terms, or possessory right. The civil court's interim order did not bar eviction, as the Code excludes civil court jurisdiction where the insolvency forum is competent. The appeal was dismissed and possession was directed to be handed over to the Resolution Professional.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.