Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The High Court held that the delay in completion of the arbitral proceedings could not be attributed to any deliberate, wilful or negligent default on the part of the petitioner or the tribunal and that sufficient cause had been made out for extension of the mandate under Section 29-A (5), Arbitration Act.
The assessee’s submitted that the authorities wrongly disallowed the carry forward of losses only because the return was filed late on 1-11-2019 at 00:00:37, and therefore not treated as a valid return under Section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
“If a Resolution Professional proceeds in terms of Section 25 of the IBC and secures the assets from the creditors, the creditors would not be entitled to claim set-off during the course of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process.”
Delhi High Court: A Division Bench of Manmohan and Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora JJ. disposed the petition and directed the respondents to
Jharkhand High Court: A Single Judge Bench of Shree Chandrashekhar, J., partly allowed a writ petition filed against an order passed by