Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Preliminary-expense amortisation and MAT exempt-income adjustments prevailed, while trademark costs and managerial remuneration require fresh verifica...
Export valuation requires contemporaneous evidence; unrelated invoices cannot prove overvaluation, and dual penalties on firm and partner are impermis...
Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Nature-dependent electricity contracts receive new Ind AS accounting, hedge designation, transition and financial-statement disclosure requirements fr...
Insolvency and BankruptcyMarch 14, 2024Case LawsAT
Undervalued/preferential/fraudulent transactions - Failure to adjudicate about the ingredients of Section 43, 45, 49 and 66, specifically - need for separate consideration of preferential, undervalued, and fraudulent transactions, each requiring distinct scrutiny and evidence - NCLAT found that the Adjudicating Authority's order lacked sufficient scrutiny and analysis. The Court observed that the Authority merely recorded its conclusions without adequately considering the individual nature of each transaction and without referencing the pleadings or materials on record. Specifically, the Tribunal noted that the Authority's conclusion of fraudulent transactions lacked detailed reasoning and examination of the ingredients required to establish fraud.
Undervalued/preferential/fraudulent transactions - Failure to adjudicate about the ingredients of Section 43, 45, 49 and 66, specifically - need for separate consideration of preferential, undervalued, and fraudulent transactions, each requiring distinct scrutiny and evidence - NCLAT found that the Adjudicating Authority's order lacked sufficient scrutiny and analysis. The Court observed that the Authority merely recorded its conclusions without adequately considering the individual nature of each transaction and without referencing the pleadings or materials on record. Specifically, the Tribunal noted that the Authority's conclusion of fraudulent transactions lacked detailed reasoning and examination of the ingredients required to establish fraud.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4826 
Join Channel 
