Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal held that the Section 7 application filed by the Financial Creditor was hopelessly barred by limitation and dismissed it. The cause of action for refund of investment arose on 16.12.2010 as per the agreement, and the limitation period of three years expired on 15.12.2013. The Corporate Debtor had refunded the amount of Rs. 1.7 crores to the Financial Creditor through third parties, and the Financial Creditor's long silence indicated satisfaction of the refund of Rs. 3 crores. The Tribunal found no grounds to invoke Section 65 of the IBC for imposing penalty on the Financial Creditor as the Corporate Debtor did not plead that the proceedings were initiated maliciously or with fraudulent intent. The appeal was allowed.
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal held that the Section 7 application filed by the Financial Creditor was hopelessly barred by limitation and dismissed it. The cause of action for refund of investment arose on 16.12.2010 as per the agreement, and the limitation period of three years expired on 15.12.2013. The Corporate Debtor had refunded the amount of Rs. 1.7 crores to the Financial Creditor through third parties, and the Financial Creditor's long silence indicated satisfaction of the refund of Rs. 3 crores. The Tribunal found no grounds to invoke Section 65 of the IBC for imposing penalty on the Financial Creditor as the Corporate Debtor did not plead that the proceedings were initiated maliciously or with fraudulent intent. The appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
