Prohibited importation of cosmetics without prior regulatory registration attracts seizure and confiscation; warehousing or re export claims do not cu...
Provisional release on security permitted where cash deposit plus bond secures differential duty; classification and treaty benefits referred for deci...
Customs Valuation Rule Sequence must be followed; single-comparator re-determination and penalties set aside without comparability or proof of mis-dec...
Separately Identifiable Services: transportation found to be the essential character, so Cargo Handling classification and extended limitation rejecte...
After repeal of SICA and failure to approach the NCLT within the...
SICA repeal and abatement of rehabilitation proceedings barred further control over company assets; illegal share allotments and sales were struck down.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
After repeal of SICA and failure to approach the NCLT within the statutory period, pending BIFR/AAIFR proceedings abated and the earlier BIFR winding-up recommendation revived. GDCL, having only management rights and no ownership, had no authority to control or alienate JUL or JAIL assets, and the fresh share allotments in JAIL to GDCL group companies were illegal. Unauthorized sales were not validated; completed sales of the Kanpur Jute Mill and two JAIL properties were left undisturbed, but the scrap sale was set aside with refund and interest. The Court rejected reliance on Article 142 and legitimate expectation, directed time-bound verification and payment of workers' and provident fund dues, and treated the pending winding-up petition as infructuous.
After repeal of SICA and failure to approach the NCLT within the statutory period, pending BIFR/AAIFR proceedings abated and the earlier BIFR winding-up recommendation revived. GDCL, having only management rights and no ownership, had no authority to control or alienate JUL or JAIL assets, and the fresh share allotments in JAIL to GDCL group companies were illegal. Unauthorized sales were not validated; completed sales of the Kanpur Jute Mill and two JAIL properties were left undisturbed, but the scrap sale was set aside with refund and interest. The Court rejected reliance on Article 142 and legitimate expectation, directed time-bound verification and payment of workers' and provident fund dues, and treated the pending winding-up petition as infructuous.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.