Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
International transaction benchmarking restricts transfer pricing adjustments to associated-enterprise dealings, while functional comparability govern...
Joint development agreements defer taxable transfer where possession lacks part performance, while completed flats determine consideration and exempti...
Passenger baggage re-export requires true declaration and cannot be granted indirectly through discretionary redemption of undeclared prohibited goods...
Insolvency and BankruptcyApril 15, 2024Case LawsAT
Initiation of CIRP based on a corporate guarantee provided to a consortium of lenders- Validity of deed of Guarantee - The tribunal noted that the guarantee exceeded the statutory limits under Section 186 but highlighted that the corporate debtor and principal borrower were closely linked family businesses. This closeness implied a level of awareness and consent to the risks involved, undermining the appellant's argument for invalidity based on statutory non-compliance. It was established that the deed of guarantee was executed in favor of the trusteeship managing the consortium’s interest, thus granting the lenders, including the respondent bank, the right to enforce the guarantee. The tribunal dismissed the appellant's claim of lack of privity of contract.
Initiation of CIRP based on a corporate guarantee provided to a consortium of lenders- Validity of deed of Guarantee - The tribunal noted that the guarantee exceeded the statutory limits under Section 186 but highlighted that the corporate debtor and principal borrower were closely linked family businesses. This closeness implied a level of awareness and consent to the risks involved, undermining the appellant's argument for invalidity based on statutory non-compliance. It was established that the deed of guarantee was executed in favor of the trusteeship managing the consortium’s interest, thus granting the lenders, including the respondent bank, the right to enforce the guarantee. The tribunal dismissed the appellant's claim of lack of privity of contract.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4814 
Join Channel 
