Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
Effective service of a demand notice under Sections 8 and 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code is directed to making the corporate debtor aware of the default and proposed insolvency action. Service sent to the respondent's email address recorded on the MCA portal was treated as valid electronic service. The NCLAT further held that, if the Adjudicating Authority doubted proof of service, it should have given the appellant an opportunity to place material and explain compliance before rejecting the Section 9 application. Dismissal on a ground raised by the Tribunal without hearing the appellant, especially where the respondent remained ex parte, was held perverse. The rejection order was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh decision on merits.
Effective service of a demand notice under Sections 8 and 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code is directed to making the corporate debtor aware of the default and proposed insolvency action. Service sent to the respondent's email address recorded on the MCA portal was treated as valid electronic service. The NCLAT further held that, if the Adjudicating Authority doubted proof of service, it should have given the appellant an opportunity to place material and explain compliance before rejecting the Section 9 application. Dismissal on a ground raised by the Tribunal without hearing the appellant, especially where the respondent remained ex parte, was held perverse. The rejection order was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh decision on merits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4790
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
