Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
The NCLAT upheld admission of CIRP and rejected the objection that Tower 5 should be excluded from the Section 7 threshold, holding that the insolvency was initiated for the same real estate project as a whole and that the Adjudicating Authority could examine the total units and applicants accordingly. It held that the IBC moratorium under Section 14 and its overriding effect under Section 238 prevent arbitration or interim orders from obstructing CIRP, and that claims over development rights or termination issues must be considered by the Resolution Professional at the appropriate stage. The Tribunal also held that development rights can form part of the corporate debtor's property under Section 3(27), while the admission order made no conclusive finding on title to Tower 5.
The NCLAT upheld admission of CIRP and rejected the objection that Tower 5 should be excluded from the Section 7 threshold, holding that the insolvency was initiated for the same real estate project as a whole and that the Adjudicating Authority could examine the total units and applicants accordingly. It held that the IBC moratorium under Section 14 and its overriding effect under Section 238 prevent arbitration or interim orders from obstructing CIRP, and that claims over development rights or termination issues must be considered by the Resolution Professional at the appropriate stage. The Tribunal also held that development rights can form part of the corporate debtor's property under Section 3(27), while the admission order made no conclusive finding on title to Tower 5.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.