Religious purpose exclusion versus charitable purpose: non overriding religious objects do not attract Explanation 3, registration directed under sect...
Search-assessment proviso jurisdiction, time-barred valuation reports, and denial of cross-examination vitiate valuation-based and confession-based ad...
Proceeds of crime: provisional attachment confirmed; equivalent value attachment and acquisition date fair market value upheld, Covid exclusion preser...
NCLAT held that proceedings concerning an alleged company deposit under Sections 73(4) and 74(1) of the Companies Act, 2013 could be examined by the NCLT on their own merits despite pending probate proceedings, because the tribunal had jurisdiction over whether the deposit was made, the amount due, and its proper safekeeping. The earlier appellate order was confined to substitution of the deceased petitioner and did not bar adjudication of the deposit dispute. It further held that claimant-beneficiaries may prosecute limited protective proceedings for preservation of the estate before probate is granted, and that Section 213 of the Indian Succession Act does not bar such protective relief.
NCLAT held that proceedings concerning an alleged company deposit under Sections 73(4) and 74(1) of the Companies Act, 2013 could be examined by the NCLT on their own merits despite pending probate proceedings, because the tribunal had jurisdiction over whether the deposit was made, the amount due, and its proper safekeeping. The earlier appellate order was confined to substitution of the deceased petitioner and did not bar adjudication of the deposit dispute. It further held that claimant-beneficiaries may prosecute limited protective proceedings for preservation of the estate before probate is granted, and that Section 213 of the Indian Succession Act does not bar such protective relief.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
