Country of Origin Certificates and declared transaction value supported preferential customs exemption where authenticity and invoice prices remained ...
Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Page of 4814
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
381 to 400 of 96262 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
A sanctioned scheme of arrangement assigning specified creditors' claims to the 63 Moons Group was held binding on all specified creditors, including dissenters, because the claims pursued in the civil suits arose from the same NSEL payment default and fell within the scheme. Once the settlement trigger event occurred, those claims, including claims against consenting brokers, stood assigned to the assignee, so the appellants could not continue independent civil proceedings for covered claims. The Tribunal also refused to revisit the scheme's legality, noting that earlier orders upholding it had already attained finality and were affirmed on merits by the Supreme Court. The appeal was dismissed.
A sanctioned scheme of arrangement assigning specified creditors' claims to the 63 Moons Group was held binding on all specified creditors, including dissenters, because the claims pursued in the civil suits arose from the same NSEL payment default and fell within the scheme. Once the settlement trigger event occurred, those claims, including claims against consenting brokers, stood assigned to the assignee, so the appellants could not continue independent civil proceedings for covered claims. The Tribunal also refused to revisit the scheme's legality, noting that earlier orders upholding it had already attained finality and were affirmed on merits by the Supreme Court. The appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.