Service permanent establishment requires non-auxiliary services, while arm's-length distributor remuneration precludes further profit attribution in I...
Make-available condition excludes standard SaaS subscription receipts where customers receive no independently usable technical knowledge after subscr...
Anonymous donation classification fails where charitable trusts maintain undisputed donor identity records and evidence corpus contributions' intended...
Transfer pricing method selection favours TNMM where medical-equipment distribution involves substantial post-import value addition and operational ri...
Post-export shipping bill conversion remains available where contemporaneous evidence supports EPCG benefits despite curable procedural omissions and ...
The High Court held that the writ petition challenging the respondent Bank's actions in not releasing amounts deposited in an Escrow Account for payment of statutory liabilities like GST from 2017 onwards is maintainable, despite other disputes being adjudicated before the Debts Recovery Tribunal. The Bank's adjustments to the receivables in the Escrow Account for loan repayment, resulting in non-compliance with statutory requirements like filing GSTR-3B and non-payment of GST, constituted a breach of the Escrow Agreement. The petitioner Company did not have control or the right to operate the Escrow Account, which was to be operated by the respondent Bank as per the Agreement. Consequently, the writ petition was allowed.
The High Court held that the writ petition challenging the respondent Bank's actions in not releasing amounts deposited in an Escrow Account for payment of statutory liabilities like GST from 2017 onwards is maintainable, despite other disputes being adjudicated before the Debts Recovery Tribunal. The Bank's adjustments to the receivables in the Escrow Account for loan repayment, resulting in non-compliance with statutory requirements like filing GSTR-3B and non-payment of GST, constituted a breach of the Escrow Agreement. The petitioner Company did not have control or the right to operate the Escrow Account, which was to be operated by the respondent Bank as per the Agreement. Consequently, the writ petition was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
