{"id":174974,"date":"2017-12-11T15:54:58","date_gmt":"2017-12-11T10:24:58","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=174974"},"modified":"2017-12-11T15:54:58","modified_gmt":"2017-12-11T10:24:58","slug":"delhi-high-court-upholds-vires-s-4b-sick-industrial-companies-special-provisions-repeal-act-2003","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/12\/11\/delhi-high-court-upholds-vires-s-4b-sick-industrial-companies-special-provisions-repeal-act-2003\/","title":{"rendered":"Delhi High Court upholds the vires of S. 4(b) of Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Repeal Act, 2003"},"content":{"rendered":"

Delhi High Court:<\/strong> A Division Bench comprising of Sanjiv Khanna and Pratibha M. Singh, JJ dismissed a writ petition before it which challenged the constitutional validity of Section 4(b) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Repeal Act, 2003 (hereinafter the \u2018Repeal Act\u2019).<\/p>\n

The petitioner claimed to be engaged in manufacturing a full range of industrial equipment for sugar and other industries. It claimed to have run a highly profitable business till 1994-95. after which it started facing severe losses. The petitioner was consequently declared a sick company in 1999 by the Board for Industrial & Financial Reconstruction (hereinafter \u2018BIFR\u2019) and IDBI was appointed as the operating agency for the purposes of formulating the scheme. During the pendency of the draft rehabilitation scheme, the Repeal Act was enforced and the proceedings before BIFR were abated.<\/p>\n

The petitioner\u2019s grievance is that it\u2019s scheme, which was pending before BIFR, was at a very advanced stage and was almost on the verge of acceptance a day prior to the notification. The petitioner had taken several steps throughout the lengthy process and had undergone, several rounds of the proceedings before the BIFR and the Appellate Authority for Industrial & Financial Reconstruction (hereinafter ‘AAIFR’) and that it was mere misfortune that the scheme was not approved by the BIFR on 30th November, 2016 and the notification came on 1st December, 2016. The petitioner, in effect, challenged the vires of Section 4(b). The petitioner also argued that classification between cases where schemes were pending and schemes that were sanctioned was not based on any intelligible differentia and does not satisfy the object sought to be achieved.<\/p>\n

The Court rejected the arguments stating that the provision which differentiates between sick companies with approved draft schemes and those without one does not violate Article 14 of the Constitution of India. It also rejected the argument that the petitioner had a legitimate expectation pertaining to their claims. The Court observed that there was no legal basis to this argument, considering the right of the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum had not been taken away. Petition dismissed. [M\/s ATV Projects (India) Ltd v. Union of India,\u00a02017 SCC OnLine Del 12136<\/a>, decided on 05.12.2017]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Delhi High Court: A Division Bench comprising of Sanjiv Khanna and Pratibha M. Singh, JJ dismissed a writ petition before it which <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":91,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[7691,26194],"class_list":["post-174974","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-bifr","tag-sick-company"],"yoast_head":"\nDelhi High Court upholds the vires of S. 4(b) of Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Repeal Act, 2003 | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/12\/11\/delhi-high-court-upholds-vires-s-4b-sick-industrial-companies-special-provisions-repeal-act-2003\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Delhi High Court upholds the vires of S. 4(b) of Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Repeal Act, 2003\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Delhi High Court: A Division Bench comprising of Sanjiv Khanna and Pratibha M. Singh, JJ dismissed a writ petition before it which\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/12\/11\/delhi-high-court-upholds-vires-s-4b-sick-industrial-companies-special-provisions-repeal-act-2003\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2017-12-11T10:24:58+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Delhi-HC.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1329\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"888\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Saba\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Saba\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2017\\\/12\\\/11\\\/delhi-high-court-upholds-vires-s-4b-sick-industrial-companies-special-provisions-repeal-act-2003\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2017\\\/12\\\/11\\\/delhi-high-court-upholds-vires-s-4b-sick-industrial-companies-special-provisions-repeal-act-2003\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Saba\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/e8e76b10dfc9c0d576324bfdbb2c2785\"},\"headline\":\"Delhi High Court upholds the vires of S. 4(b) of Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Repeal Act, 2003\",\"datePublished\":\"2017-12-11T10:24:58+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2017\\\/12\\\/11\\\/delhi-high-court-upholds-vires-s-4b-sick-industrial-companies-special-provisions-repeal-act-2003\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":377,\"commentCount\":0,\"keywords\":[\"BIFR\",\"sick company\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Case Briefs\",\"High Courts\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2017\\\/12\\\/11\\\/delhi-high-court-upholds-vires-s-4b-sick-industrial-companies-special-provisions-repeal-act-2003\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2017\\\/12\\\/11\\\/delhi-high-court-upholds-vires-s-4b-sick-industrial-companies-special-provisions-repeal-act-2003\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2017\\\/12\\\/11\\\/delhi-high-court-upholds-vires-s-4b-sick-industrial-companies-special-provisions-repeal-act-2003\\\/\",\"name\":\"Delhi High Court upholds the vires of S. 4(b) of Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Repeal Act, 2003 | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2017-12-11T10:24:58+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/e8e76b10dfc9c0d576324bfdbb2c2785\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2017\\\/12\\\/11\\\/delhi-high-court-upholds-vires-s-4b-sick-industrial-companies-special-provisions-repeal-act-2003\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2017\\\/12\\\/11\\\/delhi-high-court-upholds-vires-s-4b-sick-industrial-companies-special-provisions-repeal-act-2003\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2017\\\/12\\\/11\\\/delhi-high-court-upholds-vires-s-4b-sick-industrial-companies-special-provisions-repeal-act-2003\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Delhi High Court upholds the vires of S. 4(b) of Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Repeal Act, 2003\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/e8e76b10dfc9c0d576324bfdbb2c2785\",\"name\":\"Saba\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/a815285315cd85d8b3246c60ed8ed99825949c1b85b370c49212daa54ededa98?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/a815285315cd85d8b3246c60ed8ed99825949c1b85b370c49212daa54ededa98?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/a815285315cd85d8b3246c60ed8ed99825949c1b85b370c49212daa54ededa98?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Saba\"},\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/author\\\/editor_2\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Delhi High Court upholds the vires of S. 4(b) of Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Repeal Act, 2003 | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/12\/11\/delhi-high-court-upholds-vires-s-4b-sick-industrial-companies-special-provisions-repeal-act-2003\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Delhi High Court upholds the vires of S. 4(b) of Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Repeal Act, 2003","og_description":"Delhi High Court: A Division Bench comprising of Sanjiv Khanna and Pratibha M. Singh, JJ dismissed a writ petition before it which","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/12\/11\/delhi-high-court-upholds-vires-s-4b-sick-industrial-companies-special-provisions-repeal-act-2003\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2017-12-11T10:24:58+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1329,"height":888,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Delhi-HC.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Saba","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Saba","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/12\/11\/delhi-high-court-upholds-vires-s-4b-sick-industrial-companies-special-provisions-repeal-act-2003\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/12\/11\/delhi-high-court-upholds-vires-s-4b-sick-industrial-companies-special-provisions-repeal-act-2003\/"},"author":{"name":"Saba","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e8e76b10dfc9c0d576324bfdbb2c2785"},"headline":"Delhi High Court upholds the vires of S. 4(b) of Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Repeal Act, 2003","datePublished":"2017-12-11T10:24:58+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/12\/11\/delhi-high-court-upholds-vires-s-4b-sick-industrial-companies-special-provisions-repeal-act-2003\/"},"wordCount":377,"commentCount":0,"keywords":["BIFR","sick company"],"articleSection":["Case Briefs","High Courts"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/12\/11\/delhi-high-court-upholds-vires-s-4b-sick-industrial-companies-special-provisions-repeal-act-2003\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/12\/11\/delhi-high-court-upholds-vires-s-4b-sick-industrial-companies-special-provisions-repeal-act-2003\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/12\/11\/delhi-high-court-upholds-vires-s-4b-sick-industrial-companies-special-provisions-repeal-act-2003\/","name":"Delhi High Court upholds the vires of S. 4(b) of Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Repeal Act, 2003 | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2017-12-11T10:24:58+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e8e76b10dfc9c0d576324bfdbb2c2785"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/12\/11\/delhi-high-court-upholds-vires-s-4b-sick-industrial-companies-special-provisions-repeal-act-2003\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/12\/11\/delhi-high-court-upholds-vires-s-4b-sick-industrial-companies-special-provisions-repeal-act-2003\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/12\/11\/delhi-high-court-upholds-vires-s-4b-sick-industrial-companies-special-provisions-repeal-act-2003\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Delhi High Court upholds the vires of S. 4(b) of Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Repeal Act, 2003"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e8e76b10dfc9c0d576324bfdbb2c2785","name":"Saba","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a815285315cd85d8b3246c60ed8ed99825949c1b85b370c49212daa54ededa98?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a815285315cd85d8b3246c60ed8ed99825949c1b85b370c49212daa54ededa98?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a815285315cd85d8b3246c60ed8ed99825949c1b85b370c49212daa54ededa98?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Saba"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_2\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":216778,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/12\/bom-hc-statutory-disability-to-prosecute-accused-under-s-138-of-ni-act-is-not-removed-by-enforcement-of-sica-repeal-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":174974,"position":0},"title":"Bom HC | Statutory disability to prosecute accused under S. 138 of NI Act is not removed by enforcement of SICA Repeal Act","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"July 12, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Bombay High Court:\u00a0Rohit B. Deo, J. allowed a petition filed against the order of the trial court whereby it had issued process against the accused-petitioners for the offence punishable under Section 138\u00a0(dishonour of cheque)\u00a0of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The accused were a company registered under the Companies Act and\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":54441,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/02\/no-proceedings-against-the-assets-of-the-company-can-be-taken-before-any-decision-is-taken-by-the-bifr\/","url_meta":{"origin":174974,"position":1},"title":"No proceedings against the assets of the company can be taken before any decision is taken by the BIFR","author":"Sucheta","date":"July 2, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court : While dealing with the issue relating to jurisdiction of BIFR in winding up proceedings, the Court held that winding up proceedings before the Company Court cannot continue after a reference has been registered by the BIFR and an enquiry has been initiated under Section 16 of the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/DSC_5487.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/DSC_5487.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/DSC_5487.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/DSC_5487.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/DSC_5487.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/DSC_5487.jpg?resize=1400%2C800&ssl=1 4x"},"classes":[]},{"id":287313,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/03\/20\/unsecured-creditors-bound-to-accept-scaled-down-value-of-dues-vis-vis-object-and-purpose-of-sica-1985-legal-news-legal-research-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":174974,"position":2},"title":"Unsecured creditors vis-\u00e0-vis object of SICA, 1985: Rehabilitation scheme binds all, holds Supreme Court","author":"Editor","date":"March 20, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"To make the company viable, the unsecured creditor would have to sacrifice to some extent otherwise the revival efforts would fail, observed the Supreme Court..","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Unsecured creditors","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-788.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-788.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-788.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-788.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":91051,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/12\/13\/exemption-of-tax-on-capital-gains-cannot-be-granted-to-an-undertaking-showing-profit-on-ground-of-its-revival-charted-out-of-bifr\/","url_meta":{"origin":174974,"position":3},"title":"Exemption of tax on capital gains cannot be granted to an undertaking showing profit on ground of its revival charted out of BIFR","author":"Saba","date":"December 13, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court: A Division Bench was seized of the question whether an undertaking which was being revived by BIFR could be granted a tax exemption from capital gains. The facts in issue were a textile machinery manufacturer became sick in 2001 and the BIFR charted out a rehabilitation scheme\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":285008,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/24\/period-of-suspension-of-legal-proceedings-is-excludable-in-computing-the-period-of-limitation-for-enforcement-of-right-in-terms-of-s-225-sica-supreme-court-legal-research-lega\/","url_meta":{"origin":174974,"position":4},"title":"Period of suspension of legal proceedings is excludable in computing limitation period for enforcement of right under Section 22(5), SICA: Supreme Court","author":"Apoorva","date":"February 24, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court held that the period of suspension of legal proceedings is excludable in computing the period of limitation for the enforcement of such right in terms of Section 22(5), SICA. Further, the dismissal of the application under Section 9, IBC on the ground of \u2018pre-existing dispute\u2019 cannot be held\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-526.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-526.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-526.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-526.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":284360,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/18\/delhi-high-court-quashes-show-cause-notice-issued-by-revenue-intelligence-as-it-chose-not-to-submit-proof-of-claim-resolution-professional-corporate-insolvency-resolution-plan-bifr-sica-ibc-insolvency\/","url_meta":{"origin":174974,"position":5},"title":"[IBC] Statutory authorities chose not to submit their proof of claim; Delhi High Court quashes show cause issued by Directorate of Revenue Intelligence","author":"Editor","date":"February 18, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"In the instant case, the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence neither submitted proof of claim nor responded to a specific communication via an e-mail addressed to Senior Intelligence Officer. This is a case where despite knowledge, the statutory authorities chose not to submit their proof of claim.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Delhi High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-418.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/174974","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/91"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=174974"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/174974\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=174974"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=174974"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=174974"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}