Courier transshipment of imported goods via named carrier to air cargo stations renewed until 30.01.2026; exemption conditional, strict controls apply...
Insurer's investment gains and investment write-downs face Section 263 revision; enquiry upheld, Rule 5(b)(ii) lapse sustained, late corrigendum quash...
The insolvency admission was upheld because the corporate debtor could not reopen the validity of bank guarantee invocation after the DRT had already found that the guarantees were invoked before expiry and that finding had attained finality. The tribunal also treated the later one time settlement as a formal acknowledgment of the outstanding debt, and the debtor's failure to comply with that settlement constituted default. In view of the admitted sanction of the credit facility, execution of the corporate guarantee and mortgage, and remittance by the bank on invocation, the challenge to admission was untenable and the insolvency application remained valid.
The insolvency admission was upheld because the corporate debtor could not reopen the validity of bank guarantee invocation after the DRT had already found that the guarantees were invoked before expiry and that finding had attained finality. The tribunal also treated the later one time settlement as a formal acknowledgment of the outstanding debt, and the debtor's failure to comply with that settlement constituted default. In view of the admitted sanction of the credit facility, execution of the corporate guarantee and mortgage, and remittance by the bank on invocation, the challenge to admission was untenable and the insolvency application remained valid.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.