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...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
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.