Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
721 to 740 of 96333 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
A fresh claim for possession of premises in liquidation was barred by res judicata and issue estoppel because the later application was virtually identical to the earlier rejected one and no liberty had been reserved to re-agitate it. On merits, the HC held that summary jurisdiction under Section 457 of the Companies Act is confined to whether the Official Liquidator has a relevant reason to remain in possession. As liquidation was continuing and the premises were still being used, continued retention was justified, and the applicant could not compel surrender of vested tenancy rights or conversion to a leave and licence arrangement. The application was dismissed with costs.
A fresh claim for possession of premises in liquidation was barred by res judicata and issue estoppel because the later application was virtually identical to the earlier rejected one and no liberty had been reserved to re-agitate it. On merits, the HC held that summary jurisdiction under Section 457 of the Companies Act is confined to whether the Official Liquidator has a relevant reason to remain in possession. As liquidation was continuing and the premises were still being used, continued retention was justified, and the applicant could not compel surrender of vested tenancy rights or conversion to a leave and licence arrangement. The application was dismissed with costs.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
