Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
Applying Mobilox, the NCLAT held that the alleged pre-existing dispute was not contemporaneous with the invoices and was unsupported by material showing a genuine dispute over the 2021 supplies. Emails acknowledging outstanding dues, requests for time, and post-dated cheques amounted to acknowledgment of liability, while the later reply to the Section 138 notice raised only a counter-claim about 2018 iPhone 8 inventory and Apple-related discount issues, not the operational debt in question. The Local Commissioner's report and later arbitration involving Apple were rejected as irrelevant. The defence was held to be a moonshine defence, so debt and default under section 9 stood proved. The section 10A objection also failed, and the Section 9 application was directed to be admitted.
Applying Mobilox, the NCLAT held that the alleged pre-existing dispute was not contemporaneous with the invoices and was unsupported by material showing a genuine dispute over the 2021 supplies. Emails acknowledging outstanding dues, requests for time, and post-dated cheques amounted to acknowledgment of liability, while the later reply to the Section 138 notice raised only a counter-claim about 2018 iPhone 8 inventory and Apple-related discount issues, not the operational debt in question. The Local Commissioner's report and later arbitration involving Apple were rejected as irrelevant. The defence was held to be a moonshine defence, so debt and default under section 9 stood proved. The section 10A objection also failed, and the Section 9 application was directed to be admitted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.