Attachment and proclamation of sale of immovable property: limitation treated from financial year end; proclamation held within period, petition dismi...
Second Schedule attachment and validity of a post-notice mortgage: TRO cannot declare mortgage void ab initio; sale and appropriation allowed thereaft...
Limitation for final assessment under sections 144C and 153 treated jointly, resulting in quashing of timebarred assessment order and liberty to reviv...
Deductibility of settlement payments for securities law penalties and treatment of unexplained cash credits in share trading -- Tribunal upholds posit...
Threshold for allottee-initiated insolvency petitions in leasehold real estate upheld; petition admitted after possession letters deemed legally ineff...
Contravention of foreign exchange rules in crossborder diamond payments; appellate tribunal reduces one appellant's penalty for delay and proportional...
Withdrawal of a Section 9 insolvency petition on the basis of settlement brings the lis to an end, and restoration is not maintainable unless the withdrawal order expressly reserves that liberty. The NCLAT held that a settlement, once acted on through consensual withdrawal, is executable as a concluded arrangement, but the law of restoration applicable to dismissed-for-default matters does not apply. Breach of settlement terms does not amount to a fresh operational debt default justifying revival of the concluded insolvency proceeding; the proper remedy lies in enforcement or recovery before the appropriate forum in accordance with law. The appeal against rejection of restoration was therefore upheld.
Withdrawal of a Section 9 insolvency petition on the basis of settlement brings the lis to an end, and restoration is not maintainable unless the withdrawal order expressly reserves that liberty. The NCLAT held that a settlement, once acted on through consensual withdrawal, is executable as a concluded arrangement, but the law of restoration applicable to dismissed-for-default matters does not apply. Breach of settlement terms does not amount to a fresh operational debt default justifying revival of the concluded insolvency proceeding; the proper remedy lies in enforcement or recovery before the appropriate forum in accordance with law. The appeal against rejection of restoration was therefore upheld.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.