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" ?
Initiation of CIRP - Relevant date of default - The Tribunal noted the appellant’s arguments about defaults prior to the RBI’s COVID-19 moratorium guidelines but also observed that the application for CIRP and the recall notice came after the implementation of these guidelines. The Tribunal concluded that while the initial default might have occurred before the pandemic, the formal procedures for CIRP were only initiated after the pandemic began, thereby falling within the protective scope of Section 10A of the IBC. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, upholding the adjudicating authority's decision not to initiate CIRP, but noted that the appellant retains the right to pursue other legal remedies to recover the debt.
Initiation of CIRP - Relevant date of default - The Tribunal noted the appellant’s arguments about defaults prior to the RBI’s COVID-19 moratorium guidelines but also observed that the application for CIRP and the recall notice came after the implementation of these guidelines. The Tribunal concluded that while the initial default might have occurred before the pandemic, the formal procedures for CIRP were only initiated after the pandemic began, thereby falling within the protective scope of Section 10A of the IBC. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, upholding the adjudicating authority's decision not to initiate CIRP, but noted that the appellant retains the right to pursue other legal remedies to recover the debt.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.