Articles and Updates

• -

New Delhi, April 26: The Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) has made it clear that income from letting out buildings /developed space along with other amenities in an industrial park/special economic zones (SEZs) would only be treated as “business income” and not as “income from house property”.

• -

We are delighted to announce that Shadaan Mohammed Saipillai has joined Phoenix Legal as a Partner in its Chennai office, deepening the firm's strength in South India.

• -

In Pegasus Assets Reconstruction P Ltd v M/s Haryana Concast Limited(1) a division bench of the Supreme Court held that a company court (through the official liquidator) cannot wield any control in respect of a sale of secured assets by a secured creditor in exercise of powers available to the creditor under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act 2002. The decision clarifies the position of law and reconciles conflicting decisions from several high courts.

• Dr Rajeev Uberoi -

A division bench of the Supreme Court has recently, in its decision in Chief Controlling Revenue Authority vs. Coastal Gujarat Power Ltd. & others held that a mortgage deed executed between borrower and a security trustee, who acts for the benefit of the lending banks in a consortium lending, would not be treated as a single document but as a document encompassing ‘distinct matters’ or ‘distinct transactions’ and would be liable for stamp duty as if distinct mortgages were recorded in favour of each lendin

• -

In a recent decision in Kotak Mahindra Ltd. vs. Trupti Sanjay Mehta of Bombay1, a division bench of the Bombay High Court (V.M. Kanade & A.R. Joshi, JJ.) has held that loans granted by a Non-Banking Financial Company (NBFC) cannot be recovered by instituting proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act), even if the loan is assigned by the NBFC to a bank or securitisation company.