Proportionate interest, unexplained credits and partner remuneration disputed; proofs of fund nexus and lender identity were decisive and disallowance...
Capital gains valuation from stamp assessment versus net consideration for residential reinvestment: deemed stamp value replaced for gains but not for...
An insolvency application filed in the name of a company that had already amalgamated and ceased to exist was held not maintainable because the applicant lacked any subsisting juristic existence on the date of institution. The earlier scheme approving amalgamation had dissolved the transferor company without winding up, and a later order on the effective date did not revive juristic status in the name used for the Section 9 filing. In the absence of material showing that the named applicant continued in law when proceedings were initiated, dismissal of the company petition as not maintainable was affirmed.
An insolvency application filed in the name of a company that had already amalgamated and ceased to exist was held not maintainable because the applicant lacked any subsisting juristic existence on the date of institution. The earlier scheme approving amalgamation had dissolved the transferor company without winding up, and a later order on the effective date did not revive juristic status in the name used for the Section 9 filing. In the absence of material showing that the named applicant continued in law when proceedings were initiated, dismissal of the company petition as not maintainable was affirmed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
