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" ?
Insolvency and BankruptcyAugust 30, 2024Case LawsAT
Once symbolic possession of the property is taken over by the appellant under the SARFAESI Act, 2002, the moratorium u/s 96 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code prevents the appellant from further proceedings against the property until the moratorium is lifted. The Appellate Tribunal upheld the order barring the appellant from proceeding further under SARFAESI Act regarding the subject property while the moratorium is in effect, dismissing the appeal. This aligns with the recent Delhi High Court judgment that a bank cannot proceed under SARFAESI Act due to the interim moratorium arising from pending insolvency proceedings against the personal guarantor.
Once symbolic possession of the property is taken over by the appellant under the SARFAESI Act, 2002, the moratorium u/s 96 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code prevents the appellant from further proceedings against the property until the moratorium is lifted. The Appellate Tribunal upheld the order barring the appellant from proceeding further under SARFAESI Act regarding the subject property while the moratorium is in effect, dismissing the appeal. This aligns with the recent Delhi High Court judgment that a bank cannot proceed under SARFAESI Act due to the interim moratorium arising from pending insolvency proceedings against the personal guarantor.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
