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 Appellate Tribunal dismissed the appeal, holding that the Section 7 application filed by the Financial Creditor was not barred by Section 10A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). The Corporate Debtor had committed defaults on 21.12.2017 and 29.06.2018, leading to accounts being declared as NPA by lenders. Although assignment was made in favor of the Financial Creditor in 2019 and a settlement was agreed upon on 26.04.2019, which was not honored, constituting a further default prior to the Section 10A period. The Section 7 application was based on the default arising from the Consent Decree dated 29.08.2022, which cannot be pegged within the Section 10A period. The Adjudicating Authority did not err in admitting the Section 7 application, as it was not hit by Section 10A of the IBC.
The Appellate Tribunal dismissed the appeal, holding that the Section 7 application filed by the Financial Creditor was not barred by Section 10A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). The Corporate Debtor had committed defaults on 21.12.2017 and 29.06.2018, leading to accounts being declared as NPA by lenders. Although assignment was made in favor of the Financial Creditor in 2019 and a settlement was agreed upon on 26.04.2019, which was not honored, constituting a further default prior to the Section 10A period. The Section 7 application was based on the default arising from the Consent Decree dated 29.08.2022, which cannot be pegged within the Section 10A period. The Adjudicating Authority did not err in admitting the Section 7 application, as it was not hit by Section 10A of the IBC.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
