Functional comparability under TNMM: broadcasters excluded, software distributors included, and no separate interest on receivables after working capi...
Page of 4811
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
4201 to 4220 of 96208 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
An appellant seeking repayment of a deposit must prove that the respondent company actually received the amount as its deposit; where the receipt and bank details showed credit to another entity treated as a separate legal person, the claim against the company was not maintainable on that basis. Once the company entered corporate insolvency resolution process, the moratorium barred continuation of pending proceedings and the insolvency framework became the only route for recovery through submission of a claim in the insolvency process. The appeal was therefore treated as infructuous, without prejudice to pursuit of the insolvency remedy.
An appellant seeking repayment of a deposit must prove that the respondent company actually received the amount as its deposit; where the receipt and bank details showed credit to another entity treated as a separate legal person, the claim against the company was not maintainable on that basis. Once the company entered corporate insolvency resolution process, the moratorium barred continuation of pending proceedings and the insolvency framework became the only route for recovery through submission of a claim in the insolvency process. The appeal was therefore treated as infructuous, without prejudice to pursuit of the insolvency remedy.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4811 
Join Channel 
