Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
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...
Insolvency and BankruptcyMarch 30, 2024Case LawsAT
Ownership of leasehold rights over the subject plot - demand for enhanced land cost was raised much before initiation of CIRP - The tribunal held that the demand for enhanced compensation by the respondent was valid and pre-dated the initiation of CIRP. It was emphasized that the respondent's rights could not be overridden by the provisions of the IBC, 2016, without compliance with the original terms of the lease deed. - The tribunal clarified that the clean slate principle does not extend to demands made by public authorities before the initiation of CIRP, especially when such demands pertain to clearing defects in the title of the land itself. - The judgement highlights the balance between the objectives of the IBC, 2016, and the rights of public sector authorities over leased assets.
Ownership of leasehold rights over the subject plot - demand for enhanced land cost was raised much before initiation of CIRP - The tribunal held that the demand for enhanced compensation by the respondent was valid and pre-dated the initiation of CIRP. It was emphasized that the respondent's rights could not be overridden by the provisions of the IBC, 2016, without compliance with the original terms of the lease deed. - The tribunal clarified that the clean slate principle does not extend to demands made by public authorities before the initiation of CIRP, especially when such demands pertain to clearing defects in the title of the land itself. - The judgement highlights the balance between the objectives of the IBC, 2016, and the rights of public sector authorities over leased assets.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4794
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
