Vaish Associates Advocates

22/12/2023

Enjoy the holiday season and may the end of the year bring you joy and happiness. Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

10/11/2023

🪔 Wishing everyone a joyous and prosperous 🪔

23/12/2022

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year 2023!

22/10/2022

Wish you a very Happy Diwali

12/10/2022

Our Partner Kavita Jha has moderated a "One Day Tax Colloquium” organised by Achromic Point on:

• New Reassessment Regime & Issues under the Faceless Assessment and first appeal Scheme
• Case Studies on two recent income tax disputes
• Taxation of Virtual Digital Assets including cryptocurrencies and NFT – Cross Border, FEMA Issues

30/09/2022

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”), in Vikas Dahiya v. Arrow Engineering Limited [Company Appeal (AT)(Insolvency) No. 699 of 2022] (“Appeal No. 699 of 2022”) and Oval Investment Private Limited v. Arrow Engineering Limited [Company Appeal (AT)(Insolvency) No. 812 of 2022] (“Appeal No. 812 of 2022”), held that re-agitating an issue which has attained finality is an abuse of the process of law.

Read it here: https://www.vaishlaw.com/re-agitating-an-issue-which-has-attained-finality-is-an-abuse-of-the-process-of-law/

03/07/2022

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”) has in its judgement dated May 9, 2022 (“Judgement”), in the matter of Sahara India v. Shri Nandkishor Vishnupant Deshpande and Another [Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 368 of 2021] held that the National Company Law Tribunal (“NCLT”) does not have the power to suo-moto classify a transaction as a preferential transaction under the provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”).

Read it here:

Between The Lines | NCLAT: The NCLT does not have the power to suo-moto classify a transaction as a ‘preferential transaction’. June 22, 2022

27/05/2022

| NCLT: Corporate debtor cannot be sent into liquidation just because liquidation value is more than the value of the resolution plan.

The National Company Law Tribunal, Kolkata (“NCLT”) has in its order dated April 6, 2022, in the matter of CFM Asset Reconstruction Private Limited v. S. S. Natural Resources Private Limited and Another [IA No. 538/KB/2021 in CP (IB) No. 349/KB/2017] held that a corporate debtor cannot be sent into liquidation just because liquidation value is more than the value of the resolution plan.

Read it here: https://lnkd.in/dwRJES-8

Between The Lines | NCLT: Corporate debtor cannot be sent into liquidation just because liquidation value is more than the value of the resolution plan May 24, 2022

05/05/2022

The Hon’ble Supreme Court has on 04.05.2022 pronounced much awaited decision in the case of Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal: C. A. No. 3005/2022. The said decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court will give rise to numerous issues and litigation will not be put to rest.

In this Tax Buzz, we have analyzed, repercussion of the Judgment and have also given some general defences that may be available to the assessees.

Read the here:

25/04/2022

: Once parties acknowledge existence of arbitration clause, court can appoint arbitrator even if stamp duty is insufficiently paid.

The Bombay High Court (“BHC”) has in the judgement dated February 28, 2022 (“Judgement”), in the matter of Pigments and Allieds v. Carboline (India) Private Limited and Official Liquidator and Liquidator of Octamec Engineering Limited [Arb. Application 225 of 2016] held that once parties acknowledge existence of arbitration clause, court can appoint arbitrator even if stamp duty is insufficiently paid.

Read it here: https://lnkd.in/dJhhfsk8

21/04/2022

We are pleased to share the link of our newsletter “Between the Lines” of April 2022, a briefing on legal matters of current interest.

Below are the key highlights of the newsletter:

• BHC: Once parties acknowledge existence of arbitration clause, court can appoint arbitrator even if stamp duty is insufficiently paid.

• NCLT: Resolution Plan cannot be rejected on a perceived grievance by a suspended director who failed to take steps.

• NCLAT: There is no conflict between Section 17B of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 and the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

• NCLT: No insolvency proceedings can be initiated under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 against personal guarantors of Non Banking Financial Companies unless threshold of asset size of INR 500 Crores is satisfied.

Read it here:https://www.vaishlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Between-the-Lines-April-2022.pdf

23/03/2022

- March 2022 -

Pleased to share our latest newsletter “Between the Lines” of March 2022, a briefing on legal matters of current interest.

of the newsletter are:

: No possibility negotiating the resolution plan in the intervening period between approval by the CoC, and pending the approval of the NCLT.

: Multiple arbitrations can exist if the cause of action continues or arises after the constitution of a tribunal.

: Compensation in lieu of specific performance cannot be granted under the Specific Relief Act, 1963 unless specifically claimed in the plaint.

Read it here: https://lnkd.in/dXizwtrd