19/12/2024

To maintain a complaint and to frame a charge under Section 138 of the NI Act, there must be a specific averment against the person concerned that he was in-charge of, and responsible for the company concerned in the matter of conduct of its business – Ravi Dhingra Vs. State of NCT of Delhi and Anr. – Supreme Court

/ 5 minutes of reading

The law enunciated in the decision in Ashok Shewakramani & Ors. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh & Anr. (2023) ibclaw.in 87 SC is that to maintain a complaint and to frame a charge under Section 138 of the NI Act, there must be a specific averment against the person concerned that he was in-charge of, and responsible for the company concerned in the matter of conduct of its business. This position is now well settled and is being followed with alacrity.

To maintain a complaint and to frame a charge under Section 138 of the NI Act, there must be a specific averment against the person concerned that he was in-charge of, and responsible for the company concerned in the matter of conduct of its business – Ravi Dhingra Vs. State of NCT of Delhi and Anr. – Supreme Court Read Post »

Interest payable by the employer under Section 7Q and the damages levied under Section 14B of the EPF Act will also be covered as dues from the employer and the same does not form part of the Liquidation Estate and will fall outside the waterfall mechanism as stipulated under Section 53 of the IBC – Employees Provident Fund Organisation (EPFO) Vs. Sandeep D. Maheshwari, Liquidator of Shiv Mfg. Pipes Pvt. Ltd. – NCLT Mumbai Bench

/ 4 minutes of reading

Login with GoogleOR Username Password Remember Me     Forgot Password In case you’ve already logged in, click here

Interest payable by the employer under Section 7Q and the damages levied under Section 14B of the EPF Act will also be covered as dues from the employer and the same does not form part of the Liquidation Estate and will fall outside the waterfall mechanism as stipulated under Section 53 of the IBC – Employees Provident Fund Organisation (EPFO) Vs. Sandeep D. Maheshwari, Liquidator of Shiv Mfg. Pipes Pvt. Ltd. – NCLT Mumbai Bench Read Post »

Initiation of reassessment proceedings under Sections 148A(b) and 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and issuance of the notice under Section 148 are in violation of the Section 14 of the IBC – McNally Bharat Engineering Co. Ltd. Vs. Union of India and Ors. – Calcutta High Court

/ 11 minutes of reading

The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court held that initiation of reassessment proceedings under Sections 148A(b) and 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and issuance of the notice under Section 148 are in violation of the Section 14 of the IBC. Furthermore, the resolution plan approved by the NCLT has overriding authority, as per Section 238 of the IBC and expressly precludes reassessment or revision proceedings for the period prior to the effective date stipulated in the plan. The respondents’ actions are in direct contravention of these provisions.

Initiation of reassessment proceedings under Sections 148A(b) and 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and issuance of the notice under Section 148 are in violation of the Section 14 of the IBC – McNally Bharat Engineering Co. Ltd. Vs. Union of India and Ors. – Calcutta High Court Read Post »

Scroll to Top