NCLAT Delhi held that resignation from directorship of Corporate Debtor not a sufficient ground leading to revocation of his personal guarantee. Accordingly, application u/s. 95 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code rightly admitted for failure of repayment in respect of their guarantee obligation.
Gauhati High Court held that writ petition is not maintainable due to availability of alternative efficacious remedy under the provisions of Section 85 of the Finance Act, 1994 before appellate authority. Accordingly, writ petition dismissed.
ITAT Jaipur held that withdrawing approval under section 10(23C)(vi) of the Income Tax Act not justified in absence of any corroborative evidence of personal benefit of trustees and misuse of funds. Accordingly, appeal allowed and registration u/s. 10(23C)(vi) restored.
Bombay High Court held that registration of vehicle in the name of innocent purchaser cannot be cancelled solely on the basis that initial registration was obtained by making false representation on the basis of forged documents.
NCLAT Delhi held that acknowledgment of liability by Corporate Debtor in its balance sheets constitutes valid acknowledgement for both borrower and guarantor. Accordingly, the present appeal is allowed.
Orissa High Court held that filing of writ petition challenging adjudication order under section 73 of the GST Act after inordinate delay of around one year with adequate reasoning for inordinate delay cannot be entertained. Accordingly, writ petition is dismissed.
ITAT Jaipur held that penalty orders under section 271D and 271E of the Income Tax Act passed beyond 6 months from end of the month in which assessments were completed is barred by limitation. Accordingly, appeal of revenue stands dismissed.
Gujarat High Court held that reopening of assessment under section 148 of the Income Tax Act is liable to be quashed since name of the petitioner is not appearing in any of the information and documents which were found during course of search. According, petition is allowed.
ITAT Hyderabad held that invocation of revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 of the Income Tax Act unsustainable since AO has taken plausible view. Accordingly, assessment order is neither erroneous nor prejudicial hence revision order quashed.
CESTAT Hyderabad held that gold pendant are finished gold jewellery hence classifiable under Customs Tariff Heading [CTH] 7113 and not under CTH 7108. Accordingly, benefit of exemption from payment of customs duty admissible.
