The appeal arose from a dispute regarding the service of a ...

Lender's premature filing of insolvency petition against guarantor despite agreed notice period.

November 29, 2024

Case Laws IBC AT

The appeal arose from a dispute regarding the service of a demand notice and the subsequent filing of a petition u/s 95 of the Code. The appellant argued that the period for service of the demand notice should be counted as per Section 95(4)(b) of the Code, disregarding the period mentioned in the guarantee agreement. The Tribunal held that based on Clause 3 of the personal guarantee deed, the guarantor had 60 days from the date of the demand notice to pay the amount. The petition u/s 95 was filed prematurely, within one month of the demand notice, contrary to the agreement. The Tribunal correctly allowed the respondent's application and dismissed the appellant's petition u/s 95, along with imposing costs. The Appellate Tribunal found no merit in the appeal and dismissed it.

View Source

← Previous Next →

The appeal arose from a dispute regarding the service of a ...

Lender's premature filing of insolvency petition against guarantor despite agreed notice period.

November 29, 2024

Case Laws IBC AT

You may also like:

Levy of GST - payment of notice pay by an employee to the applicant-employer in lieu of notice period - There can be no dispute about this fact that the applicant as...

Non-filer assessee had taxable income but failed to file return u/s 139(1), later filed return in response to notice u/s 148 without considering section 50C provisions,...

Validity of SCN - extended period of limitation - earlier show cause notice was adjudicated by the Authority and the proceedings were dropped - In the present case, the...

Reassessment action initiated based on Section 148 notice and subsequent Section 148A(b) notice violated the First Proviso to Section 149(1) and was barred by the...

Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - When the A.O. admits in the notice under section 142(1) Dated 20.10.2014 that assessee filed return of income under section 148 of the...

The appellant challenged the summoning order on the ground that the complaint was not premature, as it was filed within the limitation period of one month from the cause...

The High Court quashed the impugned show cause notice for service tax demand exceeding Rs. 50,00,000/- due to the department's failure to conduct mandatory pre-notice...

Limitation Period for issuance of notice u/s 143(2) - Scrutiny Assessment - Relevant date - after filing of the return of income, defect notice u/s 139(9) had been sent...

Validity of SCN - Reversal of Input Tax Credit - In the show-cause notice, the respondents have alleged that the notice i.e. petitioner has willfully filed the return on...

The issue pertains to the taxability of notice pay or amounts recovered by employers from employees upon premature resignation. The department contended that such...

Time Limitation - Curable Defect - Electronic Filing Compliance - Procedural Compliances vs. Substantive Rights: - The High Court found that the petitioners complied...

Period of limitation to issue notice for reopening of assessment u/s 149 - The High court emphasized the principle that the validity of a notice u/s 148 must be assessed...

Assessment order u/s 147 read with Section 144B was challenged on grounds of violation of principles of natural justice as virtual hearing was not granted despite...

Validity of the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) - Assumption of jurisdiction to make an assessment - No return of income filed by assessee - Whether a curable defect...

Section 80P deduction claim filed in a return submitted in response to notice u/s 142(1) is valid. The Income Tax Act does not mandate that the return must be filed u/ss...

Quick Updates: