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 Tribunal examined the maintainability of an application for initiating the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) u/s 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). It addressed the issue of condonation of delay in filing the petition. The Operational Creditor (OC) claimed a bona fide belief that the petition was filed within the limitation period. However, the Tribunal held that Section 5 of the IBC applies to applications filed u/ss 7 or 9, and cited the Supreme Court's decision in B.K Educational Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Parag Gupta And Associates, which stated that the right to sue accrues when a default occurs, and if the default occurred over three years prior to the application filing, it would be barred under Article 137 of the Limitation Act, except in cases where Section 5 may be applied to condone the delay. The Tribunal rejected the OC's plea of bona fide belief and held that the mandatory provision must be complied with, and the delay must be sufficiently and convincingly explained for condonation. Finding no merit in the appeal, the NCLAT dismissed it.
The Tribunal examined the maintainability of an application for initiating the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) u/s 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). It addressed the issue of condonation of delay in filing the petition. The Operational Creditor (OC) claimed a bona fide belief that the petition was filed within the limitation period. However, the Tribunal held that Section 5 of the IBC applies to applications filed u/ss 7 or 9, and cited the Supreme Court's decision in B.K Educational Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Parag Gupta And Associates, which stated that the right to sue accrues when a default occurs, and if the default occurred over three years prior to the application filing, it would be barred under Article 137 of the Limitation Act, except in cases where Section 5 may be applied to condone the delay. The Tribunal rejected the OC's plea of bona fide belief and held that the mandatory provision must be complied with, and the delay must be sufficiently and convincingly explained for condonation. Finding no merit in the appeal, the NCLAT dismissed it.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
