NCLAT Delhi held that once a transaction has been held to a fraudulent transaction there is no limitation to look back if the other ingredients of Section 66 (1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code are satisfied. Accordingly, appeal of appellants is dismissed.
ITAT Jaipur held that interest received on enhanced compensation is nothing but compensation and hence for the interest received was eligible for exemption u/s. 10(37) of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, appeal of department dismissed.
Delhi High Court held that provision of support service in India to foreign universities and institutions qualifies as export of services under Rule 6A of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 and the same is not ‘intermediary’ in terms of rule 2(f) of Place of Provision of Service Rules, 2012.
NCLAT Delhi held that debt arising from advance payment to corporate debtor for the supply of goods qualifies as operational debt under section 5(21) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, [IBC]. Accordingly, operational debt and default established hence section 9 application rightly admitted.
NCLT Mumbai held that an operational creditor, cannot be converted into a financial creditor by way of a Settlement with the corporate debtor. Accordingly, application for classification of claim as financial creditor dismissed.
Madras High Court held that reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Income Tax Act against the deceased assessee sustained since income tax department not informed about the death of the deceased assessee.
CESTAT Chennai held that order holding appeals to be time-barred is set aside since period spent honestly and diligently by a litigant prosecuting a proceeding before a wrong forum is to be excluded while computing limitation.
Kerala High Court held that proceedings against petitioner [recipient] for Input Tax Credit mis-match cannot be sustained since no proceedings have been initiated against the supplier. Accordingly, proceedings initiated against recipient is not legally sustainable.
NCLT Delhi held that application under section 33(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code for liquidation of Corporate Debtor [M/s. VHV Beverages Private Limited] is allowed as decided by Committee of Creditor [CoC]. Accordingly, the present application is allowed.
Kerala High Court held that benefit of Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme (SVLDRS) admissible even though payment was affected after cut of date as extension since payment was made within period extended on account of COVID-19 pandemic.
