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...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
A belated operational creditor claim in CIRP was rejected because the claimant did not supply the breakup and supporting material needed for verification, and the claim could not be matched with the corporate debtor's records. The NCLAT held that the claimant failed to rebut the Resolution Professional's reasons for rejection, including non-response to repeated requests and lack of proof for the asserted interest component. Because the resolution process had already advanced to the stage where the resolution plan was approved by the Committee of Creditors and filed before the Adjudicating Authority, the deficient claim could not be entertained. The rejection was upheld and the appeal dismissed.
A belated operational creditor claim in CIRP was rejected because the claimant did not supply the breakup and supporting material needed for verification, and the claim could not be matched with the corporate debtor's records. The NCLAT held that the claimant failed to rebut the Resolution Professional's reasons for rejection, including non-response to repeated requests and lack of proof for the asserted interest component. Because the resolution process had already advanced to the stage where the resolution plan was approved by the Committee of Creditors and filed before the Adjudicating Authority, the deficient claim could not be entertained. The rejection was upheld and the appeal dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
