Reopening Assessments invalid where satisfaction and jurisdictional approval are absent for third party seized material, leading to quashing of assess...
Benami property exclusion from the insolvency estate: Benami Act proceedings preclude IBC tribunals from reopening attachments or treating such assets...
Exclusion of limitation period: pandemic suspension plus debtor acknowledgement can extend limitation, requiring fresh factfinding on guarantee invoca...
Page of 4813
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
5941 to 5960 of 96257 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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.