In present facts of the case, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India invoked Article 142 of the Constitution of India and have directed to form new arbitral Tribunal due to disputes in the fee structure provided in IV Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Held that Section 48 of the GVAT Act is not contrary to or inconsistent with Section 53 of the IBC. U/s. 53(1)(b)(ii), the debts owed to a secured creditor, which would include the State under the GVAT Act. Accordingly, the Government can claim first charge over the property of the Corporate Debtor
AO has passed order u/s 148A(d) and issued notice u/s 148 of the Act. The AO was issued notice u/s 148A(b) of the Act along with details of information and the inquiry forming basis of reopening.
Supreme Court dismisses Anshul Jain’s SLP challenging the re-opening notice under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act. High Court’s decision upheld
When an order has been passed by SC, it has to be given effect in letter and spirit & it cannot be permitted to be treated as a paper order.
A drawer who signs a cheque and hands it over to the payee, is presumed to be liable unless the drawer adduces evidence to rebut the presumption that the cheque has been issued towards payment of a debt or in discharge of a liability. The presumption arises under Section 139.
Union of India Vs Citi Bank, N.A. (Supreme Court) It is a settled proposition of law that when the proceedings are required to be initiated within a particular period provided under the Statute, the same are required to be initiated within the said period. However, where no such period has been provided in the Statute, […]
Held that once the Liquidator applies to NCLT, to adopt particular mode of sale of movable and immovable assets of the Corporate Debtor, which is approved by NCLT, there is no provision in the IBC that empowers NCLAT to suo motu conduct a judicial review of the said decision.
Held that Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 is mandatory and hold that any suit instituted violating the mandate of Section 12A must be visited with rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11.
SC held that IBC would prevail over Customs Act, and once moratorium is imposed in terms of sections 14 or 33(5) of Code, the customs authority only has a limited jurisdiction to assess/determine quantum of customs duty and other levies.
