Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
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.
TaxTMI 
of 4786
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
