Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
The Appellant failed to establish operational debt and privity of contract with the Respondent regarding supply of goods. No documentary evidence or tripartite agreement stipulating terms and conditions of guarantee undertaken by Respondent for goods supplied to third party by Appellant was produced. Invoices were raised by third parties, not Appellant, precluding justifiable claim against Respondent. Absence of operational debt rendered Section 9 IBC proceedings initiation precondition non-existent. Respondent denied liability and questioned privity of contract in Section 8 reply. Application filed beyond three years limitation period from default date, hence time-barred. Appellant misused IBC provisions for recovery from Respondent instead of insolvency resolution. Adjudicating Authority rightly rejected Section 9 application lacking merit. Appeal dismissed by Appellate Tribunal.
The Appellant failed to establish operational debt and privity of contract with the Respondent regarding supply of goods. No documentary evidence or tripartite agreement stipulating terms and conditions of guarantee undertaken by Respondent for goods supplied to third party by Appellant was produced. Invoices were raised by third parties, not Appellant, precluding justifiable claim against Respondent. Absence of operational debt rendered Section 9 IBC proceedings initiation precondition non-existent. Respondent denied liability and questioned privity of contract in Section 8 reply. Application filed beyond three years limitation period from default date, hence time-barred. Appellant misused IBC provisions for recovery from Respondent instead of insolvency resolution. Adjudicating Authority rightly rejected Section 9 application lacking merit. Appeal dismissed by Appellate Tribunal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
