Revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 upheld; faceless assessments subject to revision when AO fails requisite enquiries, remitted for fresh asse...
Limited scope of processing under section 143(1): enhancement without show cause is unsustainable; remand for residency, taxation and TDS verification...
Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code requires the existence of a financial debt and default, but the Supreme Court held that insolvency cannot be used as a coercive recovery tool. Reading the quadripartite agreement, the Court found that the disbursement was made to the builder and was tied to construction, transfer, refund contingencies, non-transfer without consent, and security creation, making the dispute predominantly contractual rather than a simple lending default. As recovery proceedings were already pending before the DRT, initiation of CIRP was unwarranted and the refusal to admit the Section 7 application was upheld.
Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code requires the existence of a financial debt and default, but the Supreme Court held that insolvency cannot be used as a coercive recovery tool. Reading the quadripartite agreement, the Court found that the disbursement was made to the builder and was tied to construction, transfer, refund contingencies, non-transfer without consent, and security creation, making the dispute predominantly contractual rather than a simple lending default. As recovery proceedings were already pending before the DRT, initiation of CIRP was unwarranted and the refusal to admit the Section 7 application was upheld.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
