Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
Insolvency and BankruptcyMarch 13, 2024Case LawsAT
Rejection of Section 9 application - Initiation of CIRP - pre-existing dispute - The tribunal meticulously analyzed the arguments from both sides and relevant legal provisions under the IBC. It focused on whether there was a plausible pre-existing dispute between the parties concerning the operational debt. - The NCLAT found that there indeed was a pre-existing dispute regarding the operational debt, primarily based on the appellant's breach of the Agency Agreement, leading to its termination by the respondent. The tribunal noted that the appellant's illegal activities and the subsequent termination of the agreement formed the basis of the dispute. - The tribunal concluded that the Adjudicating Authority (AA) did not err in dismissing the Section 9 application, as the operational debt was disputed.
Rejection of Section 9 application - Initiation of CIRP - pre-existing dispute - The tribunal meticulously analyzed the arguments from both sides and relevant legal provisions under the IBC. It focused on whether there was a plausible pre-existing dispute between the parties concerning the operational debt. - The NCLAT found that there indeed was a pre-existing dispute regarding the operational debt, primarily based on the appellant's breach of the Agency Agreement, leading to its termination by the respondent. The tribunal noted that the appellant's illegal activities and the subsequent termination of the agreement formed the basis of the dispute. - The tribunal concluded that the Adjudicating Authority (AA) did not err in dismissing the Section 9 application, as the operational debt was disputed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.