Transfer-pricing aggregation of distinct support-service and subcontract transactions was rejected, while debt-free receivables attracted no notional ...
Customs exemptions cover photovoltaic assembly machinery and PVF backsheets, while fully declared cleared imports may avoid confiscation and penalties...
Specific tariff classification for LCD devices overrides treatment as electricity-meter parts, defeating differential duty, extended limitation, and p...
Stayed disciplinary punishment does not establish unfitness for insolvency professional registration; reconsideration must disregard mere pendency of ...
Indirect corporate control can create related-party status, excluding financial creditors from Committee of Creditors representation, participation an...
Page of 4881
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
101 to 120 of 97618 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
IBBI suspended the registration of the Petitioner for two years due to various allegations. The High Court found that the Petitioner did not violate any regulations by imposing a non-refundable participation fee on bidders before a specific regulation was in force. Regarding the appointment of unregistered valuers, the Court noted that the valuers involved were registered individually, and their work was accepted without issue. However, the Court upheld the charge of appointing a support service, BRAL, in which the Petitioner was a partner, to increase fees, which contravened Liquidation Regulations. The Court modified the suspension to the period already served, acknowledging 20 months of suspension already undergone. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
IBBI suspended the registration of the Petitioner for two years due to various allegations. The High Court found that the Petitioner did not violate any regulations by imposing a non-refundable participation fee on bidders before a specific regulation was in force. Regarding the appointment of unregistered valuers, the Court noted that the valuers involved were registered individually, and their work was accepted without issue. However, the Court upheld the charge of appointing a support service, BRAL, in which the Petitioner was a partner, to increase fees, which contravened Liquidation Regulations. The Court modified the suspension to the period already served, acknowledging 20 months of suspension already undergone. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4881 
