Skip to main content

Posts

Showing posts from October, 2022

Shares of listed companies under lock-in-period are not “quoted shares”

Cause Title :  Deputy Commissioner Of Gift Tax, Central Circle-II  vs  M/s Bpl Limited,  Civil Appeal No. 3265 Of 2016, Supreme Court Of India Date of Judgment/Order : October 13, 2022 Corum : Sanjiv Khanna & J.K. Maheshwari, JJ Citied:  Ahmed G.H. Ariff and Others v. Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Calcutta Purshottam N. Amarsay and Another v. Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Bombay Commissioners of Inland Revenue v. Crossman Lynall and Another v. Inland Revenue Commissioners Abrahams v. The Federal Commissioner of Taxation R. Rathinasabapathy Chettiar v. Commissioner of Wealth-Tax, Madras Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Chennai v. Shri Thirupathy Kumar Khemka Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai v. Sadhana Devi Background The Taxpayer was holding shares in two public limited companies (transferred companies), which were listed and quoted on Bangalore stock exchange. The shares held by the Taxpayer were part of promoter’s quota and were, therefore, restricted from being traded on stock exchange

Tax is a secured interest and the State is a secured creditor - this judgment will create more confusion

Cause Title : State Tax Officer (1) vs Rainbow Papers Limited, Supreme Court Of India, Civil Appeal No. 1661 Of 2020 Date of Judgment/Order : September 6, 2022 Corum : Indira Banerjee & A.S. Bopanna, JJ Citied:  Ghanshyam Mishra & Sons (P) Ltd. V. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Co. Ltd. Ebix Singapore Private Limited V. Committee of Creditors of Educomp Solutions Limited and Another Vishal Saxena & Anr. v. Swami Deen Gupta Resolution Professional Assistant Commissioner of Customs v. Mathur Sabhapathy Vishwanathan Background The Tax Dept. claiming that an amount of Rs.53,71,65,489/- is due from the Respondent, initiated recovery proceedings around 2016 against the respondent, in respect of its dues for the year 2011- 2012, and the appellant attached the property of the respondent. One Neeraj Papers Private Limited, as operational creditor of the respondent, filed an application under  the IBC before Ahmedabad Bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), for initiation

Distribution of proceeds through CIRP under Insolvency Code is as per voting share

Cause Title :  Small Industries Development Bank of India (SIDBI) vs Vivek Raheja, Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 570 of 2022, National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Principal Bench, New Delhi Date of Judgment/Order : 16th September, 2022 Corum : Justice Ashok Bhushan & Mr. Barun Mitra Citied:  India Resurgence Arc Private Limited Vs. M/s. Amit Metaliks Limited & Anr., (Civil Appeal No. 1700 of 2021) Indian Bank Vs. Charu Desai, Erstwhile Resolution Professional & Chairman of Monitoring Committee of GB Global Ltd. & Anr., (Company Appeal (AT) Ins. No. 644 of 2021) Jaypee Kensington Boulevard Apartments Welfare Association & Ors. Vs. NBCC (India) Ltd. & Ors., [(2021) 1 SCC 401] Union Bank of India Vs. Resolution Professional of M/s Kudos Chemie Ltd. & Ors.,Company Appeal (AT) Ins. No. 665 of 2022 India Resurgence Arc. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M/s. Amit Metaliks Ltd. & Anr.- Civil Appeal No. 1700 of 2021 ICICI Bank Vs. SIDCO Leathers Ltd. & Ors., [(2006) 1

DRT cannot impose conditionalities while restoring an application

Cause Title :  M/s. Ganpat Pannalal Vs. State Bank of India, Writ Petition No. 18238 Of 2022, Madhya Pradesh High Court At Jabalpur Date of Judgment/Order : 15th Of September, 2022 Corum : Justice Sujoy Paul Citied:  Alok Saboo and others v. State Bank of India and others 2013 SCC OnLine MP 10788 R.R. Flour Mills Pvt. Ltd. v. State Bank of India, 2013 SCC OnLine MP 7420 Whirlpool Corporation vs. Registrar of Trade Marks, Mumbai and others (1998) 8 SCC 1 (2003) 2 SCC 107, Harbanslal Sahnia and another Vs. Indian Oil Corpn. Ltd. And Others Rafiq and another v. Munshilal and another (1981) 2 SCC 788 Ram Kumar Gupta and another v. Har Prasad and another (2010) 1 SCC 391 Mardia Chemicals Ltd. and another v. Union of India and another (2004) 4 SCC 311 Alok Saboo and others v. State Bank of India and others 2013 SCC OnLine MP 10788 (2012) 10 SCC 1 (Natural Resources Allocation, in Re, Special Reference No.1 of 2012) DTC Vs. DTC Mazdoor Congress 1991 supp (1) SCC 600 M/s. Kranti Associates Pvt

Motive or intention necessary to establish undeserved gains through insider trading

Cause Title :  Securities And Exchange Board Of India vs Abhijit Rajan, Civil Appeal No.563 of 2020, Supreme Court Of India Date of Judgment/Order : September 19, 2022 Corum : V. Ramasubramanian & Indira Banerjee, JJ Citied: Chintalapati Raju vs SEBI Rajiv Gandhi vs SEBI Miller vs. Pezzant SEBI vs Kanaiyalal Baldevbhai Patel SEBI vs. Kishore R. Ajmera Background In the year 2012 Gammon Infrastructure Projects Limited (GIPL) was awarded a contract by National Highways Authority of India. The total cost of the project was Rs.1648 crores. The respondent herein was the Chairman and Managing Director. GIPL entered into two shareholders agreements with Simplex Infrastructure Limited (SIL). Under these agreements, GIPL was to invest in MDEPL and SIL was to invest in VGRPPL for their respective projects. The mutual investments were to be tuned in such a manner that GIPL and SIL would hold 49% equity interest in each other's projects. However, on 9.08.2013 the Board of Directors of GIPL