Daily Archive: May 29, 2021

Legal Eagles Elites presents MASTER SERIES – Vacation Special Online Intensive Coaching for APP / CJ / DJ – Aspirants / Advocates / Law Students  Topic: Gender Based Offences in Indian Penal Code 1860 Guest Faculty: Dr. A. Vijayalakshmi, Assistant Professor, SOEL – TNDALU

Legal Eagles Elites presents MASTER SERIES – Vacation Special Online Intensive Coaching for APP / CJ / DJ – Aspirants / Advocates / Law Students Topic: Gender Based Offences in Indian Penal Code 1860 Guest Faculty: Dr. A. Vijayalakshmi, Assistant Professor, SOEL – TNDALU

Legal Eagles Elites presents MASTER SERIES – Vacation Special Online Intensive Coaching for APP / CJ / DJ – Aspirants / Advocates / Law Students Topic: Gender Based Offences in Indian Penal Code 1860...

FacebookTwitterEmailBloggerGmailLinkedInWhatsAppPinterestTumblrShare
Vgp case mhc full orderA.Nos/1586, 1587, 1589 and 1590 of 2021 N.SATHISH KUMAR, J. Though the Senior Counsel for the petitioner Mr.Vijay Narayan pressed for interim Order, particularly against appointment of a receiver, after hearing the parties, this Court is of the view that the main grievance of the petitioner is with regard to the appointment of receiver not only in respect of the partnership firm but also the group of companies.

Vgp case mhc full orderA.Nos/1586, 1587, 1589 and 1590 of 2021 N.SATHISH KUMAR, J. Though the Senior Counsel for the petitioner Mr.Vijay Narayan pressed for interim Order, particularly against appointment of a receiver, after hearing the parties, this Court is of the view that the main grievance of the petitioner is with regard to the appointment of receiver not only in respect of the partnership firm but also the group of companies.

[5/28, 17:19] Sekarreporter1: O.P.Nos.310 to 313 of 2021 O.P. Nos.310 to 313 of 2021 & A.Nos/1586, 1587, 1589 and 1590 of 2021 N.SATHISH KUMAR, J. Though the Senior Counsel for the petitioner Mr.Vijay Narayan...

FacebookTwitterEmailBloggerGmailLinkedInWhatsAppPinterestTumblrShare
CLARIFICATION IN THE VGP MATTER In an interesting turn of events in the matter concerning VGP Group Companies and Firms, a challenge to the Interim Award dated 18.03.2021 was preferred by way of a four Section 34 Petitions (O.P. 310-313/2021) under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 by senior Partners of the Group namely, Mr. V.G. Santosham, V.G.P Ravidas, V.G.P Rajadas and V.G.P. Babudas. This matter was heard by Hon’ Justice N. Satish Kumar of the Madras High Court on 16.04.2021 and an interim order was passed stating that the Award dated 18.03.2021 shall only be operative on the assets of the Partnership firms, and as far as the Companies are concerned, the existing arrangement before the NCLT shall continue to take effect. The matter is put up for final hearing shortly.

CLARIFICATION IN THE VGP MATTER In an interesting turn of events in the matter concerning VGP Group Companies and Firms, a challenge to the Interim Award dated 18.03.2021 was preferred by way of a four Section 34 Petitions (O.P. 310-313/2021) under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 by senior Partners of the Group namely, Mr. V.G. Santosham, V.G.P Ravidas, V.G.P Rajadas and V.G.P. Babudas. This matter was heard by Hon’ Justice N. Satish Kumar of the Madras High Court on 16.04.2021 and an interim order was passed stating that the Award dated 18.03.2021 shall only be operative on the assets of the Partnership firms, and as far as the Companies are concerned, the existing arrangement before the NCLT shall continue to take effect. The matter is put up for final hearing shortly.

CLARIFICATION IN THE VGP MATTER In an interesting turn of events in the matter concerning VGP Group Companies and Firms, a challenge to the Interim Award dated 18.03.2021 was preferred by way of a...

FacebookTwitterEmailBloggerGmailLinkedInWhatsAppPinterestTumblrShare
Justice S.M.Subramaniam held that the respondent has not approached the Settlement Commission with true and full disclosure of his income and during the course of proceedings, offered additional income and the findings of the Settlement Commission would also confirm the same, the said offerings of the additional income would be sufficient for the purpose of arriving a conclusion that the first respondent filed an application under Section 245C of the Act without disclosing true and full income.

Justice S.M.Subramaniam held that the respondent has not approached the Settlement Commission with true and full disclosure of his income and during the course of proceedings, offered additional income and the findings of the Settlement Commission would also confirm the same, the said offerings of the additional income would be sufficient for the purpose of arriving a conclusion that the first respondent filed an application under Section 245C of the Act without disclosing true and full income.

hamburger menu Taxscan | Simplifying Tax Laws search icon SIGN IN Interest on Net Cash: GST Council recommends to Amend CGST Rules w.e.f 1st July 2017GST Council Meet: Current Ad-hoc Exemptions to Covid Relief...

FacebookTwitterEmailBloggerGmailLinkedInWhatsAppPinterestTumblrShare
WP Twitter Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com
Exit mobile version