Read all latest corporate law news, articles, notifications & circular on Taxguru.in. News on laws related to DIPP Labour Minimum Wages Gratuity PF Arbitration Negotiable instrument Essential Commodities SRFAESI Competition Act Corporate Law
Corporate Law : An opinion piece arguing for a High Court Bench in Western UP, citing heavy case pendency, Jaswant Singh Commission recommendation...
Corporate Law : Learn the legal due diligence process, key review areas, challenges, and the role of corporate lawyers in business transactions an...
Corporate Law : Article examines LLM risks in tax practice and outlines a framework for verification, confidentiality, citation checks, and profes...
Corporate Law : A UAE visa or company does not establish tax residency. Tax depends on residence tests, income, management, and supporting evidenc...
Corporate Law : P&H HC refused regular bail under the UAPA, holding prima facie material linked the accused to the alleged conspiracy and funding ...
Corporate Law : PIB outlines the FCRA framework, proposed 2026 Amendment Bill and notified Rules covering registration, reporting, asset vesting a...
Corporate Law : PIB outlines the FCRA 2026 Amendment Bill and revised Rules, covering registration, reporting, asset vesting, renewal, investigati...
Corporate Law : DRI dismantled an alleged Mephedrone manufacturing facility in Ankleshwar, seized drugs, chemicals and ₹21 lakh, and arrested th...
Corporate Law : MSME Ministry outlines CGTMSE measures including ₹10 crore guarantee ceiling, reduced AGF, enhanced coverage and awareness initi...
Corporate Law : Government outlines FTAs, Export Promotion Mission, e-commerce export reforms and logistics initiatives to diversify export market...
Corporate Law : Supreme Court clarifies the nature of Section 26(1) proceedings, appealability of CCI directions, notice requirements, and the sta...
Corporate Law : Kerala High Court held the property was not partible, upheld mandatory injunction for vacant possession, and dismissed the partiti...
Corporate Law : HC allowed the appeal against conviction under Section 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act after examining investigation,...
Corporate Law : HC upheld quashing of a vague wilful defaulter notice but allowed fresh proceedings under the RBI Master Circular with proper part...
Corporate Law : Supreme Court dissolved marriage under Article 142 citing irretrievable breakdown after over a decade of separation, while allowin...
Corporate Law : Finance Ministry issues draft 2026 rules replacing “intermediary or insurance intermediary” with “insurance intermediary”;...
Corporate Law : Finance Ministry issues draft LIC General (Second Amendment) Rules, 2026 proposing omissions in Rules 14, 15, 16, 18 and 19; comme...
Corporate Law : Ministry of Finance issued Notification G.S.R. 653(E) proposing draft amendments to the Insurance Inquiry Procedure Rules, 2016; i...
Corporate Law : Ministry of Finance issued draft Insurance Rules, 2026 under Section 114, Insurance Act, 1938 to supersede 1939 rules; invites com...
Corporate Law : IRDAI directs insurers to submit SCNs within 7 days, additional documents within 3 days, and clear pending requests within 30 days...
Re Maruti Suzuki India Limited (Competition Commission Of India) The Competition Commission of India (CCI) imposed a ₹200 crore penalty on Maruti Suzuki India Ltd (MSIL), for allegedly stifling competition with its policy of controlling the discounts dealers could offer consumers. Commission concludes that MSIL not only entered into an agreement with its dealers across […]
A large number of Government Sector nodal offices have provided a positive feedback and have made several constructive suggestions. An endeavor has been made by PFRDA to incorporate those suggestions to the extent possible in the interest of Subscribers.
Summary of some key decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has been provided below. Criminal law No obligation on Officer-in-charge to arrest accused when filing chargesheet nor arrest pre-requisite formality to take chargesheet on record by Magistrate In Siddharth v. State of Uttar Pradesh the Supreme Court has held that an accused is […]
Can a common man afford the services of a Senior Advocate? Explore the accessibility of Senior Advocates in the High Court/ Supreme Court.
All hear about electric vehicles (EV) and their future role in decarbonizing the transport sector. Equally true is our anxiety to learn about the infrastructure development for EVs and whether we are serious about its implementation. Who are the stakeholders in developing the infrastructure for EVs? NITI Aayog in association with the Ministry of power, […]
1. Background of Debate Effectuated December 2016, the Sick Industrial Companies Act[1] was repealed to pave way to the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016[2] (hereinafter “IBC”). The objects of the two acts were different in one substantial aspect: the latter focused on reviving a company so as it continues to survive as a going concern, aimed to act as a beneficial legislation and not merely focused on recovery. Recovery however being quintessential to IBC we saw that it and the Limitation Act, 1963[3] (hereinafter “Limitation Act”), which bars the right to recover money claims after a time lapse of 3 years from the cause of action, came face to face with each other and so became a long debate culminating finally this year. This debate arose on two counts. First, IBC was always meant to be a complete code in itself, an exhaustive code on the subject matter[4] and so the remedies given thereunder comprehensively cover all matters that it apprehends. Thus, it was naturally understood that IBC is not guided by any other legislative enactment. However it does not have a clause expressly barring application of limitation act which attracts Section 29 of the limitation act which brings us to the second. Second, the mandate of Section 29 of the Limitation Act makes it abundantly clear that all legislative enactments are to be guided by the Limitation Act “unless such enactment expressly excludes itself”. Now, even the words “expressly excluded” in the section have been interpreted to have a wider import by the Supreme Court (hereinafter “SC”) giving itself the power to interpret by reading of all the provisions of an act to infer such exclusion[5]. The interpretation of such an intention or otherwise rested again with the apex court. 2. Prior to Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Second Amendment) Act, 2018 Initially the NCLT held in Neelkanth Township and Construction Pvt. Ltd. v Urban Infrastructure Trustee Ltd.[6] that the “provisions of the IBC cannot be shackled by the Limitation Act”. The court noted: “There is nothing on the record that Limitation Act, 2013 is applicable to IBC. Learned Counsel for the appellant also failed to lay hand on any of the provision of IBC to suggest that the Law of Limitation Act is applicable. The IBC, 2016 is not an Act for recovery of money claim, it relates to the initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process. If there is a debt which includes interest and there is default of debt and having a continuous course of action, the argument that the claim of money by Respondent is barred by Limitation cannot be accepted.” The NCLAT based its decision on the observation in Innoventive Industries Limited v ICICI Bank & Anr [7] that IBC is a comprehensive code which implies that it is independent of other laws. Now even though there was no provision in IBC that expressly barred the Limitation Act, the court observed that it remains open for the court to conclude so on a meaningful and comprehensive reading of the provisions. This view was further supported by M/S. Speculum Plast Pvt. Ltd. v Ptc Techno Pvt. Ltd[8]. and B.K. Educational Services Private Limited v Parag Gupta.[9] Even so, acting cautiously, the courts prescribed that the underlying utility of the doctrines like that of limitation must not be forsaken and it must be ensured that a deliberate delay does not go unpunished. Undoubtedly, the above ruling was bound to result in an increase in the number of applications and appeals. In the above background the Report of the Insolvency Law Committee of March 2018[10] came in which opined that “since the intent of the Code was not to array the Code as a fresh opportunity for creditors and claimants who did not exercise their remedy under existing laws within the prescribed limitation period, the Committee thought it fit to insert a specific section applying the Limitation Act to the Code”. The legislature finally taking note of this situation came up with Section 238A inserted vide an amendment[11] which clearly provided that the Limitation Act would apply to all the proceedings or appeals before the NCLT, NCLAT, DRT and DRAT.
SC enlarges the ambit of Limitation Act, 1963 for recovery of debts. Learn about the changes and implications of this landmark judgment.
The Factoring Regulation (Amendment) Act, 2021 received the assent of the President on 7th August, 2021 and got published in the Official Gazette on 9th August, 2021. The Amendment Act shall come into force on 23rd August, 2021. (Effective date got notified vide Notification No. S.O. 3406(E) dtd. 19th August, 2021) Sr. No. Amendment Comments 1 Substitution: Section 2(a) for the […]
A. With the siege of power in Afghanistan by the militant sect Taliban, bilateral trade between India and the country is currently at high risk, the Confederation of Indian Traders (CAIT) cautioned on Tuesday. The traders’ association also alerted domestic exporters and urged the Centre to forestall any potential business losses. The CAIT statement listed […]
Sexual harassment could be a kind of unlawful employment discrimination beneath Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and is prohibited beneath the anti-harassment policy. As per the Equal Employment chance Commission, harassment is outlined as “unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favours, and alternative verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature. […]
