Faceless reassessment jurisdiction turned on retrospective AO definition, with later faceless-assessment changes treated as clarificatory and procedur...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2121 to 2140 of 96100 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Corporate guarantee and cost-overrun undertakings were interpreted as limited obligations to infuse equity, meet shortfalls, or cover specified contingencies; they did not create a liability to repay the principal borrower's loan, so a Section 7 petition against the corporate debtor was not maintainable on that basis. The tribunal also held that default of the principal borrower could not be treated as the guarantor's default; default arose only after invocation of the guarantee and non-payment thereafter, which on the bank's own case fell within the Section 10A suspension period. Non-consideration of the later guarantee deed and inconsistent treatment of the same transaction further indicated non-application of mind, making the admission order unsustainable.
Corporate guarantee and cost-overrun undertakings were interpreted as limited obligations to infuse equity, meet shortfalls, or cover specified contingencies; they did not create a liability to repay the principal borrower's loan, so a Section 7 petition against the corporate debtor was not maintainable on that basis. The tribunal also held that default of the principal borrower could not be treated as the guarantor's default; default arose only after invocation of the guarantee and non-payment thereafter, which on the bank's own case fell within the Section 10A suspension period. Non-consideration of the later guarantee deed and inconsistent treatment of the same transaction further indicated non-application of mind, making the admission order unsustainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.