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" ?
The Appellate Tribunal held that the Financial Creditor is permitted to amend the date of default pleaded in the rejoinder affidavit, as the date of default is relevant for computing the limitation period for filing an application u/s 95. It is well-settled that a Financial Creditor can supplement the application by filing additional documents. In this case, the issue of invoking the Personal Guarantor's guarantee was specifically raised. The Adjudicating Authority granted time to the Personal Guarantor to file a reply opposing the new date of default inserted by the Petitioner. The Personal Guarantor has ample opportunity to satisfy the court that the amended date is not the correct date and raise contentions regarding limitation. Parties are entitled to bring additional materials on record, which can be accepted by the Adjudicating Authority. The rights of the Personal Guarantor are fully protected, and there are no grounds to entertain the appeal, which is dismissed.
The Appellate Tribunal held that the Financial Creditor is permitted to amend the date of default pleaded in the rejoinder affidavit, as the date of default is relevant for computing the limitation period for filing an application u/s 95. It is well-settled that a Financial Creditor can supplement the application by filing additional documents. In this case, the issue of invoking the Personal Guarantor's guarantee was specifically raised. The Adjudicating Authority granted time to the Personal Guarantor to file a reply opposing the new date of default inserted by the Petitioner. The Personal Guarantor has ample opportunity to satisfy the court that the amended date is not the correct date and raise contentions regarding limitation. Parties are entitled to bring additional materials on record, which can be accepted by the Adjudicating Authority. The rights of the Personal Guarantor are fully protected, and there are no grounds to entertain the appeal, which is dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
