The tax exemption analysis of Sections 10(46) and 10(46A) does not imply that it is a fiscal concession; rather, it functions under a wider framework that is founded on controlled tax governance, with exemptions given on a conditional, selective, and by executive notice.

The central question is whether the court can extend time after the statutory 18-month period has expired, even after an arbitral award has been rendered.

NCLAT’s split outcome has paradoxically created a perpetual framework for WhatsApp that could prove to be more durable and effective than the CCI’s original prescription.

This blog delves into the trusteeship decision, which enunciates that incomplete and informal restructuring discussions cannot be relied upon to hinder the statutory trigger of insolvency once debt and default are established.

What is left is the more difficult doctrinal task of defining where the illegality-irregularity line lies in less extreme situations, of offering a legitimate way of genuine fund-use variation in private placements, and of calibrating the range of the affected class of stakeholders.

The Kerala High Court's judgment, affirmed at the SLP stage, establishes that sectoral regulation does not displace CCI jurisdiction and that the Bharti Airtel sequential model is confined to cases where a sector regulator's prior determination is a necessary input to the competition analysis.

The author suggests that Section 32A protection should only be granted conditional to due diligence safeguards including cross-verification with the ED.

Court did not adequately discuss the provisions of the IBC to determine whether the spectrum license can be considered an asset and can be treated under the IBC.

Ultimately, Tiger Global will bring radical accountability to international investment law. The biggest question is whether unilateral source-country anti-abuse measures can be adopted within the existing treaty framework or whether renewed multilateral coordination is necessary.

This referral raises a more foundational question in contract law and arbitration: what occupies a higher pedestal, absolute party autonomy or entitlement to a legal remedy upon breach?

This case will probably initiate closer examination in similar disputes, such as the case of Blackstone Capital Partners v. ACIT (Blackstone) before the Delhi High Court, and Sanofi Pasteur Holding v. Department of Revenue (Sanofi) case before Andhra Pradesh High Court.

Regardless of the power dynamics, this article has, simply put, argued for adherence to Rule 10 of the 2017 rules, Order 60/2024 of RERA, and the annexures thereof, containing the model AFS and model AL, and, in general, the RERA.

The line between inquiry and proceedings should therefore be drawn not at the formal commencement of adjudication through a SCN, but at the point where the State deploys coercive power against the taxpayer.

The Supreme Court did not see the issue in Tiger Global as an isolated dispute over taxation. It viewed the issue against the broader backdrop of treaty interpretation and the play of sovereign powers.

The proposed Section 28A of the Bill is a practical step toward resolving the long-standing problem of fragmented enforcement of third-party security and directly addresses the deadlock seen in Vistra ITCL.

The Supreme Court has indicated that its increased role in addressing fraud in insolvency will be more grounded in market logic than in corrective justice.

This article suggests a hierarchical framework for debt classification under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016 (IBC) wherein company law constraints function as threshold gatekeepers that determine whether a legally enforceable debt can arise at all, while substance-over-from analysis is put to a secondary role assessing the character of obligations that have already crystallised in law.

The challenge for India is not to dilute the principle of consent but to rethink how consent operates in interconnected commercial projects.

Until courts stop treating boilerplate jurisdiction clauses as “embedded” seat designations, the conundrum of Indian arbitration will persist. The ghost of BALCO has not yet been exorcised; it has merely found a new home in the “exclusive jurisdiction” clause.

This article contends that this judgment rightly points out the pathologies of delay, but it is imperative to embrace a structured framework through a stringent two-pronged test in differentiating between: (1) procedural illegality due to delay itself and (2) the substantive prejudice due to delay under the rules of grounds of public policy under Section 34.

A clearer statutory framework is required to prevent courts from over-expanding the notion of “conduct of parties.”

The decision clarifies that even if there is an assumption that the award is beyond what was intended in the agreement, it would not invalidate the enforceability of the award passed by the tribunal on the ground of public policy exception.

The Supreme Court's ruling in EPCC v. Matix Fertilisers upholds the integrity of corporate capital law within the IBC framework by restating the crucial differentiation between creditor debt and shareholder investment.

While the Bill creates a strong foundation, its ultimate success depends on implementation. Passing a law is only the starting point, real challenge lies in building awareness among both workers and employers, with many unfamiliar with formal procedures or maybe fearful of new obligations.