Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Page of 4801
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
341 to 360 of 96001 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Section 32A(2) of the IBC bars attachment or other action against a corporate debtor's property for offences committed before commencement of insolvency, and the statutory explanation expressly includes attachment within the prohibited action. Where the corporate debtor had already entered liquidation before the provisional attachment order was issued, the later attachment could not be sustained. The tribunal therefore treated both the provisional attachment order and its confirmation as contrary to Section 32A(2) and set them aside, holding that the property of the liquidating corporate debtor was immune from such post-liquidation attachment.
Section 32A(2) of the IBC bars attachment or other action against a corporate debtor's property for offences committed before commencement of insolvency, and the statutory explanation expressly includes attachment within the prohibited action. Where the corporate debtor had already entered liquidation before the provisional attachment order was issued, the later attachment could not be sustained. The tribunal therefore treated both the provisional attachment order and its confirmation as contrary to Section 32A(2) and set them aside, holding that the property of the liquidating corporate debtor was immune from such post-liquidation attachment.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.