Tax exemption for regulatory authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return filing...
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...
Page of 4782
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
261 to 280 of 95633 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Corporate Debtor failed to repay operational dues, leading to a Section 9 application by the Operational Creditor. However, pre-existing disputes were evident from the Notice of Disputes, fulfilling Section 8(2)(1)(a) requirements. The defense raised cannot be deemed spurious or illusory. For such disputed operational debt, Section 9 proceedings cannot be initiated. The Adjudicating Authority erred in admitting the Section 9 application, disregarding the Notice of Disputes. The reliance on Naresh Sevantilal Shah judgment was misplaced due to distinguishable facts. The Impugned Order initiating CIRP and subsequent orders were set aside, releasing the Corporate Debtor from CIRP with immediate effect. The appeal was allowed.
Corporate Debtor failed to repay operational dues, leading to a Section 9 application by the Operational Creditor. However, pre-existing disputes were evident from the Notice of Disputes, fulfilling Section 8(2)(1)(a) requirements. The defense raised cannot be deemed spurious or illusory. For such disputed operational debt, Section 9 proceedings cannot be initiated. The Adjudicating Authority erred in admitting the Section 9 application, disregarding the Notice of Disputes. The reliance on Naresh Sevantilal Shah judgment was misplaced due to distinguishable facts. The Impugned Order initiating CIRP and subsequent orders were set aside, releasing the Corporate Debtor from CIRP with immediate effect. The appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.