Genuineness of investment evidence determines LTCG entitlement; non specific regulatory reports cannot displace transaction specific documentary proof...
Page of 4816
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
5881 to 5900 of 96301 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
An appeal under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code was found invalidly instituted where it was filed and refiled without the certified copy of the impugned order and without seeking exemption from producing it. The SC held that Rule 22(2) of the NCLAT Rules requires the certified copy to accompany every appeal, and non-compliance goes to the root of institution rather than constituting a curable refiling defect. Because the appellant had not applied for the certified copy within limitation and had shown no diligence, the NCLAT was required first to verify valid institution before considering delay. Its failure to do so vitiated the condonation order, which was set aside.
An appeal under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code was found invalidly instituted where it was filed and refiled without the certified copy of the impugned order and without seeking exemption from producing it. The SC held that Rule 22(2) of the NCLAT Rules requires the certified copy to accompany every appeal, and non-compliance goes to the root of institution rather than constituting a curable refiling defect. Because the appellant had not applied for the certified copy within limitation and had shown no diligence, the NCLAT was required first to verify valid institution before considering delay. Its failure to do so vitiated the condonation order, which was set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4816 
Join Channel 
