Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
The NCLAT set aside the order and allowed the appeal, ruling that outstanding lease rental and premium due during the CIRP period cannot be included in CIRP costs. It relied on its previous decision in Sunil Kumar Agrawal case, which held that the explanation u/s 14(1)(d) of IBC is not applicable to premium amount or lease rent as they are not covered under licenses, permits, registrations, quotas, concessions, or clearances mentioned in that section. The NCLAT maintained the same order as in Sunil Kumar Agrawal case, despite NOIDA challenging it in the Supreme Court through a civil appeal where notice has been issued but no stay granted. The NCLAT will follow its previous order until the Supreme Court decides on its correctness in the pending civil appeal.
The NCLAT set aside the order and allowed the appeal, ruling that outstanding lease rental and premium due during the CIRP period cannot be included in CIRP costs. It relied on its previous decision in Sunil Kumar Agrawal case, which held that the explanation u/s 14(1)(d) of IBC is not applicable to premium amount or lease rent as they are not covered under licenses, permits, registrations, quotas, concessions, or clearances mentioned in that section. The NCLAT maintained the same order as in Sunil Kumar Agrawal case, despite NOIDA challenging it in the Supreme Court through a civil appeal where notice has been issued but no stay granted. The NCLAT will follow its previous order until the Supreme Court decides on its correctness in the pending civil appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.