Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Limitation for Section 95 insolvency proceedings against a personal guarantor ran from the date of actual invocation of the guarantee under Article 137 of the Limitation Act. Communications dated 29.01.2016 and 30.11.2018 were held not to be loan recall notices or effective invocations, as they only referred to default and possible legal action. The clear invocation occurred only on 03.08.2020, when the creditor expressly called upon the guarantor to pay. The proceedings initiated thereafter were therefore within limitation, and the NCLAT upheld their admission and dismissed the appeal.
Limitation for Section 95 insolvency proceedings against a personal guarantor ran from the date of actual invocation of the guarantee under Article 137 of the Limitation Act. Communications dated 29.01.2016 and 30.11.2018 were held not to be loan recall notices or effective invocations, as they only referred to default and possible legal action. The clear invocation occurred only on 03.08.2020, when the creditor expressly called upon the guarantor to pay. The proceedings initiated thereafter were therefore within limitation, and the NCLAT upheld their admission and dismissed the appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.