NCLAT Delhi held that financial creditor entitled to file an application under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code even after breach of settlement agreement since nature of debt doesn’t change. Thus, order admitting section 7 application sustained.
As already held by us, Section 3 (12) of the Tariff Act, as amended, is applicable only after 16th August,2024 and is not applicable to the present case. Accordingly, in the present case, no confiscation could have been imposed.
Delhi High Court held that suspension of resolution professional for two years from taking any assignment as IRP is reduced since conclusions were based on erroneous figures. Accordingly, writ disposed of.
ITAT Chandigarh held that cash deposits in assessee’s bank account was less than the amount mentioned in the reopening notice and thus reasons recorded by the AO were not found to be valid and, therefore, the reassessment framed was quashed. Accordingly, appeal of assessee allowed.
ITAT Hyderabad held that reopening of assessment u/s. 148 of the Income Tax Act is void-ab-initio since income escaped assessment doesn’t exceed Rs. 50 lakhs or more. Accordingly, assessment order passed by AO is quashed.
Madras High Court dismissed the writ appeals and held that rejection of rebate claim by taking stand that cenvat credit has lapsed in view of rule 11(3)(i) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 [CCR 2004] is not tenable.
ITAT Mumbai held that trade advances, being in the nature of commercial transaction, would not fall within the ambit of the provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the Act and therefore the addition made by the AO is deleted. Accordingly, appeal allowed.
Telangana High Court held that natural gas sold by the petitioner falls under entry 23 of 6th Schedule of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 [APGST Act 1957] and not under entry 118 of 1st Schedule.
Madras High Court held that demand of network charges in respect of energy produced by Rooftop Solar Generators is set aside as all the charges are already included in tariff. Accordingly, demand is set aside and writ petition is allowed.
NCLT Mumbai held that application u/s. 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code [IBC] after three years of MSME Council Awards is beyond limitation as per Article 137 of the Limitation Act. Accordingly, application dismissed as barred by limitation.
