Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.32 seconds)Section 8 in The Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [Entire Act]
The Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
M/S S.S. Engineers vs Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. on 15 July, 2022
The present case falls more in ratio
of HPCL Bio Fuels (Supra) rather than S.S. Engineers & Ors. (Supra).
Section 16 in The Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [Entire Act]
The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996
Section 7 in The Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [Entire Act]
Vidarbha Industries Power Limited vs Axis Bank Limited on 12 July, 2022
It is sufficient to note that in Vidarbha Industries Power
Limited (Supra), clear principles were laid down and the facts in that case were
tested against such principles before dismissing application filed for CIRP against
the Corporate Debtor. None of such elements have been discussed or analysed by
the Adjudicating Authority in the Impugned Order and thus on this aspect at least,
the Impugned Order is found to be a non-speaking order and cannot be allowed
to be sustained.
Mobilox Innovations Private Ltd vs Kirusa Software Private Ltd on 21 September, 2017
In Mobilox Innovations Pvt. Ltd. (Supra) the
Hon'ble Supreme Court has stated that dispute must be "plausible contention
which requires further investigation and not patently feeble legal argument or
Page 38 of 43
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 375 of 2024
assertion of fact unsupported by evidence". The relevant extract of the judgement
is below:
Paramjeet Singh vs Maxim Tubes Company Pvt. Ltd. & Another on 20 November, 2017
16. The Appellant submitted that this Appellate Tribunal, in the matter
of Paramjeet Singh vs. Maxim Tubes Company Pvt. Ltd. & Another (Civil Appeal
No. 9571 of 2018) has categorically held that any dispute must be raised in
response to the demand notice issued under Section 8 of the Code, failing which
it shall be deemed that no pre-existing dispute exists.
1