Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1481 to 1500 of 96333 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
