Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
Mutual fund maturity rules require proper rollover, redemption, disclosure, and due diligence; investor gains cannot excuse regulatory breaches or pen...
Threshold exemption excludes exempt services, while stamp-paper purchases avoid reverse charge; consequential service tax penalties were also set asid...
Section 7 proceedings based on a money decree cannot be used as a substitute for execution where the real dispute concerns computation of the decretal balance and ordinary enforcement remedies remain available. The Court reiterated that the IBC is meant for genuine insolvency and revival, not coercive debt recovery; on these facts, the corporate debtor was solvent, substantial payments had already been made, and the computation issue was already pending before the Delhi High Court. Although a money decree may in principle give rise to a fresh cause of action for insolvency proceedings, that principle is not automatic and the adjudicating forum must still guard against abuse. The NCLAT erred in treating the decree alone as sufficient; the insolvency application was restored to dismissal and execution was left open as the proper remedy.
Section 7 proceedings based on a money decree cannot be used as a substitute for execution where the real dispute concerns computation of the decretal balance and ordinary enforcement remedies remain available. The Court reiterated that the IBC is meant for genuine insolvency and revival, not coercive debt recovery; on these facts, the corporate debtor was solvent, substantial payments had already been made, and the computation issue was already pending before the Delhi High Court. Although a money decree may in principle give rise to a fresh cause of action for insolvency proceedings, that principle is not automatic and the adjudicating forum must still guard against abuse. The NCLAT erred in treating the decree alone as sufficient; the insolvency application was restored to dismissal and execution was left open as the proper remedy.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.