Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Page of 4827
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
141 to 160 of 96536 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Pendency of CIRP against a promoter does not, by itself, bar a society's application for deemed conveyance under MOFA. The Court held that the promoter's duty to convey the land and building arises from statutory and contractual obligations, and that deemed conveyance is a statutory mechanism to perfect the flat purchasers' title, not debt recovery or enforcement of a monetary claim. It further held that there is no inconsistency between MOFA and the IBC requiring exclusion under Section 238, and that the moratorium under Section 14 does not prevent the Competent Authority from deciding the application on merits. The refusal was set aside and the matter restored.
Pendency of CIRP against a promoter does not, by itself, bar a society's application for deemed conveyance under MOFA. The Court held that the promoter's duty to convey the land and building arises from statutory and contractual obligations, and that deemed conveyance is a statutory mechanism to perfect the flat purchasers' title, not debt recovery or enforcement of a monetary claim. It further held that there is no inconsistency between MOFA and the IBC requiring exclusion under Section 238, and that the moratorium under Section 14 does not prevent the Competent Authority from deciding the application on merits. The refusal was set aside and the matter restored.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
