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 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Insolvency and BankruptcyAugust 29, 2022Case LawsAT
CIRP - the debt of the Respondents was declared as Financial Debt - Though the learned Counsel for the Appellants would contend that the Adjudicating Authority lacks inherent jurisdiction, this contention holds no substance as the Adjudicating Authority is exclusively invested with inherent jurisdiction to decide the petition filed either under Section 7, 9 or any of the provisions of IBC - It appears that the learned Counsel for the Appellants invented such ground for the first time without any factual foundation in the pleadings before the Adjudicating Authority during 1st round of litigation - there are no merits in the contention of the learned Counsel for the Appellants. - AT
CIRP - the debt of the Respondents was declared as Financial Debt - Though the learned Counsel for the Appellants would contend that the Adjudicating Authority lacks inherent jurisdiction, this contention holds no substance as the Adjudicating Authority is exclusively invested with inherent jurisdiction to decide the petition filed either under Section 7, 9 or any of the provisions of IBC - It appears that the learned Counsel for the Appellants invented such ground for the first time without any factual foundation in the pleadings before the Adjudicating Authority during 1st round of litigation - there are no merits in the contention of the learned Counsel for the Appellants. - AT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
