Educational approval requires mandatory State registration, but incidental surplus and trustee-owned land do not prove private benefit or profit motiv...
Judicial review of settlement orders cannot reopen settled customs notices, while statutory interest remains subject to verification and quantificatio...
Customs Broker licence lending for consideration justified revocation where exporter authorisation and client verification obligations were also breac...
Fraudulent import documents suspend limitation protection, while redemption of confiscated goods requires duty and interest despite bona fide purchase...
ODR arbitration participation remains mandatory after failed conciliation, while jurisdictional and maintainability objections stay available before t...
Transparency in technical bid evaluation requires disclosed standards and recorded reasons; opaque scoring invalidated tender awards and required fres...
Automated export obligation extensions remove separate regional applications after committee approval for Advance Authorisation and EPCG authorisation...
Page of 4823
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
341 to 360 of 96456 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
A VAT attachment could not survive a liquidation sale where the Department's claim was filed belatedly, rejected, and never admitted in insolvency. The Court distinguished Rainbow Papers, noting that it concerned the unamended regulation and corporate resolution, whereas the present case arose in liquidation under the amended claim process. It held that the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code's waterfall mechanism and overriding effect prevent a pre-existing attachment from defeating the auction purchaser's title or being revived through writ proceedings. The Court also held that a statutory charge under the TNVAT Act does not, by itself, make the Department a secured creditor under the Code, and directed a contra entry in the encumbrance records.
A VAT attachment could not survive a liquidation sale where the Department's claim was filed belatedly, rejected, and never admitted in insolvency. The Court distinguished Rainbow Papers, noting that it concerned the unamended regulation and corporate resolution, whereas the present case arose in liquidation under the amended claim process. It held that the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code's waterfall mechanism and overriding effect prevent a pre-existing attachment from defeating the auction purchaser's title or being revived through writ proceedings. The Court also held that a statutory charge under the TNVAT Act does not, by itself, make the Department a secured creditor under the Code, and directed a contra entry in the encumbrance records.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4823 
Join Channel 
