NCLT Amaravati held that no notice is required to be given to the Personal Guarantor at the stage of appointment of Interim Resolution Professional (IRP).
District Court New Delhi held that the prosecution u/s 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 cannot be dismissed or stalled for non-compliance of Section 269 SS of the Income Tax Act. Such violation may give rise to an independent criminal offence, but, the prosecution of the accused for the alleged dishonour of cheque u/s 138 NI Act does not become bad in law.
NCLT Ahmedabad held that Committee of Creditors (CoC) has power to take commercial decision to undertake or not to undertake related party transaction during CIPR of Corporate Debtors. If in commercial wisdom the CoC has rejected the resolution for payment of salary to the Applicants, the question of reversing the decision cannot be considered.
Supreme court held that High Court cannot entertain Public Interest Litigations (PIL) which is based on mere allegations by the person who has not been able to fully satisfy his credentials.
Delhi High Court granted release from detention to detenu on the ground of supply of illegible/ dim/ blank pages of Relied Upon Documents (RUDs). Detention order set aside.
Supreme Court held that as per regulation 114(4) of the Company Secretaries Regulations, 1982 election can be challenged by the candidate concerned. Hence, writ petition filed by the petitioner not contesting the election of office bearers to the High Court was wrongly entertained.
NCLAT Delhi held that Financial Creditors can invoke the proceedings under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 against the Guarantor, who on default of Principal Borrower transforms into Corporate Debtor
ITAT Delhi held that reasons recorded for reopening of assessment u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act doesnt disclose that income has escaped assessment due to failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all the material facts and hence assessment order passed thereon are quashed.
ITAT Mumbai held that assessment proceedings were initiated on the basis of search operation carried out at third party wherein incriminating documents relating to assessee were allegedly found. Hence, assessment was required to be framed u/s 153C read with section 153A of the Income Tax Act and not u/s 144 and hence the said proceedings are quashed.
CESTAT Delhi uphold the order of revocation of registration of the authorized courier and forfeiture of security on account of actively violated the provisions of the act and rules by knowingly filing the bills of entry in the name of wrong consignee and also be mis-declaring the nature of the goods.
